• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Is The Disney Company a hoarder that destroys our favorite franchises?

He was outstanding. Hamill’s acting never got enough credit, he was the one who completely sold Yoda has a real being and not a puppet. Even Frank Oz credits him for that. In TLJ, he sold Luke as a man weighed down by the weight of his legacy, legend and failure. Then he manages to still learn and try to start making a difference. His sacrifice may be the most powerful scene in the franchise. In one move, he manages to save the Resistance, inspire the entire galaxy to stand up to the First Order, and show the First Order that their new Emperor is weak and really only in charge due to his powers.
...
Luke took the legend that has weighed him down and made him doubt himself and made it into a symbol to inspire.

Which is still in theme with his character arc since day one in some ways. The movie had some flaws (chiefly dispatching Snoke so quickly and with no buildup) but it's underrated in my book. Had Rian done TFA in tandem with Abrams, we'd probably be better off. No half-baked mystery boxes that we know would never get properly addressed if not at all, better villains (Benecio Del Toro was perfectly cast), Phasma being more than just Star Wars' version of Kenny who dies in every episode (as in TLJ her death isn't used as comic relief), no blatant copying (TLJ had some big homage but nothing stuck out as badly as TFA) Abrams is a first rate producer but he needs to have a co-writer and they'd nail every aspect. Like a certain Lucas/Spielbeg. Or Grant/Naylor.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Rise of Skywalker shows Hux constantly trying to undermine and backstab Kylo, especially since he now knows his weakness is his past and family. I’m hoping the stories of Luke returning and how one man stood up to AT-ATs and Kylo-Ren without getting dirty leads to a much larger Resistance ready to fight back.

Hux might lose, and quickly, but it would be interesting if not fun to see. I can't see Kylo turning good. Was hoping Rey would turn evil and join him, but that would have been too novel and creative a curveball. :( But with taking big character risks, there's always a number in the audience that will hate it no matter what. Just like with what happened to Luke (whose demise is at least far more interesting, compelling, and of greater depth than what Captain Kirk got in "Generations".)

It'd be sweet in IX to see Finn develop his light saber skills and show some growth. Not sure what made me think of that, but TFA wasn't without some worthy scenes and the brief confrontation between him and Ren was pretty worthwhile.
 
Oh, please. I don't know where you live, but months after TLJ figures were released, they were still several deep on pegs at Walmart, drugstores such as Walgreens and at grocery chains like Kroger, they were not only available, but it was not long before the figures were placed on the clearance/discount table (along with endless numbers of TFA figures, BTW). This was no mirror of the Luke-related figure sales from the Kenner/OT era by any stretch of the imagination.
Or maybe people just don't buy action figures at the grocery store? Don't forget, Amazon is a thing now.


Who on earth wanted to be Wedge? He was in all three movies for what--5 total minutes, if that? Even a dick like Ozzel had more of an impact on the story (arguably), if only to be a victim!
Wedge is the only person to survive both Death Star attacks. He literally fires one of the shots that destroys the second Death Star. Wedge is awesome.
 
How long will it be before CGI eliminates the acting profession?

It won’t.
At the very least you will need a performance to capture. And a voice to interpret the words.

Why did CBS put Star Trek behind a pay wall?

Because they wanted to attract an audience to help launch their streaming service. And, probably, because Star Trek might attract enough viewers on the network to make it cost effective
 
Why did CBS put Star Trek behind a pay wall?

Because CBS-AA needs STAR TREK. Regular network TV doesn't.

The only reason we're getting new STAR TREK tv shows at all is because CBS needed something to attract people to its new streaming service. And it needed to be something they couldn't get elsewhere.

CBS is not obliged to provide STAR TREK as a public service. :)
 
The toy market isn’t nearly what it used to be. They have to compete with tablets now, which is why so many toys have apps to connect to now.

Computer apps are more interactive, that's for sure. Sadly, the tangible toys offer more imaginative flexibility than a program, even the choose your own adventure sort... and made crossovers easier. Dark Helmet had a tea party with Darth Vader and Clumsy Smurf... until someone makes an app for that...

I hope the tablets' screens' backlighting don't emit too much UV. Remember those virtual reality devices from the 1990s with the big sticker and disclaimer stating prolonged use causes damage? But those were incandescent lamps... unless brightness is maxed out, it's like staring at a tree outdoors on a bright sunny day.

How long will it be before CGI eliminates the acting profession?

Unsure. Technology is improving but the nuances for vocal inflation will still take longer to achieve. Never mind those movies where CGI spidey is swinging across the cityscape and it looks like CGI that takes you out of the movie far worse than Superman in front of a rear screen projector while being held up by translucent Kirby wires ever could.

It's also a lot like saying robots will replace pet animals. Most people intrinsically know the difference between a mannequin and a real living thing. That's also why some sheep herders haven't used those new life size animatronic doll things that you can't bring home because you know the parents will reject it, unlike another human for which you really don't know until after they'd met...

Why did CBS put Star Trek behind a pay wall?

Possibly because sponsor ads alone were not enough to pay for it? (Season 1 was, what, $8-$10 million per episode?!) Yes, CBS-AA (not "AA") still has ads but there's an ad-free version that I recall... ads or direct payment, nothing is public - we inevitably pay for the sponsors' ads as a portion of product unit price goes into making the commercial for the TV show made and shown.
 
Are Star Trek reruns no longer playing on broadcast television? They are still available on Netflix, just not Discovery or any of the newer material.
 
In recent years, they purchased Pixar (Toy Story, Finding Nemo etc.), they purchased LucasFilm (Star Wars, Indiana Jones), they got Marvel (Every movie and comic) and they just got 20th Century Fox and Hulu (which include X-Men and The Orville among many others).

Pixar was purchased at a time they started running out of steam. Their old and most famous franchises had already played out for the most part. The Disney "Pixar" releases (they keep the names of what they consume merely to bait fans that aren't aware their favorite "indie" doesn't exist anymore) seemed more like rehashes for a money grab from old fans and the selling of toys.

Marvel wasn't exactly that but it has some of that element. For the last ~10 years (exactly the number of years Disney is in control), most Marvel movies seem cookie-cutter. It's like watching almost the same movie every single month with small variations. They are not usually terrible but most of the time you end up feeling "haven't I watched that?" and few things stick in your mind for more than 2 months.

LucasFilm was purchased at a time Lucas probably had no more ideas. The Star Wars prequels were not totally terrible because at least they were canon and different but the franchise seemed to not be what it used to be. Disney's most major attempts on that franchise was a rehash of A New Hope (Force Awakens), which was cute and comfy but ultimately a shadow of the franchise's old self for a money grab and a movie that was total nonsense in the saga (Last Jedi) since, among other things, they turned a character that refused to give up on Anakin (Luke) to someone that almost killed a child only on the suspicion he would be like Anakin (the polar opposite of what the heart of the saga used to be, hence it was total nonsense).

Now that they just got 20th Century Fox and Hulu, I expect the same treatment for X-Men and The Orville (even though The Orville is more or less a shadow of TNG already). Some milking of old fans without changing the names of parent production companies to fool old fans their favorite franchise isn't consumed by Disney).

Disney appears so obsessed in that trend of milking old franchises until they completely die that they started doing it to their own children. The Lion King 2019 appears to be the milking of an old franchise.

There is also a lot of HYPOCRISY about the entire thing. If you truly want "new", then support NEW franchises, don't milk old ones just because you know the old fans will flock unquestionably.

That means they often destroy old stories to make them "new" but turn them to nonsense because the old story no longer makes sense. It would be best for everyone to make a new franchise entirely, but that wouldn't fool the old fans their franchise still exists intact.

The best alternative for Disney is to do that they always did best: Soft reboots of very old stories that turn comfy but never revolutionary. Hell, that's what they always did, most of their iconic old movies are very old stories soft-rebooted to something comfy.

At the end of the day Disney appears best at the role of someone that takes dying franchises and soft reboots them to something comfy but never truly new. If you want new, better look at new stories entirely, because Disney never was good at that.

At their worst they don't even do that but try to change them to something that doesn't even make sense. That turns them not only weak but also annoying.
Billions and billions of dollars of revenue suggest they aren’t destroying anything but your preconceived notions.
 
It's not that clear-cut when they become that large. They currently seem to own the majority of popular sci-fi and fantasy franchises.
I don't think I'd say they own the majority of them.
Looking at the SFF movies in the Top 10 at the Box Office from 2014-today, there are quite a few not owned by Disney:

2014
Transformers: Age of Extinction
The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1
Interstellar

2015
Jurrasic World
Minions
Spectre
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
(OK I guess it could be argued Bond and Mission: Impossible aren't really sci-fi, but I think both feature enough crazy technology to qualify)
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2

2016
Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Suicide Squad

2017
Despicable Me 3
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Wolf Warrior 2
Wonder Woman

2018
Jurrasic World: Fallen Kingdom
Aquaman
Venom (OK, this is a bit more complicated since it's a Marvel property, but the movie is produced by Sony)
Mission: Impossible - Fallout
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald

2019 so far
The Wandering Earth
How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World
Pokemon: Detective Pikachu

That's just in movies, there are a lot of popular SFF TV shows not produced by Disney, and if we go into books and comics then both have hundreds or thousands of popular properties not own by Disney.
 
Exactly. His own father was second only to one as the most evil
being in the galaxy, and once he accepted Vader was his father, he tried to bring him back to the light, not kill him

Er...if you ignore that bit where he VERY MUCH tried to kill Vader and damn near succeeded.

Yet ST Luke could not handle that and decided "Nope. all is lost with this one. Off with his head!" Ridiculous.

If he'd decided that, Ren would just be dead. He REALIZED what he was doing was wrong and backed off. That's all. It's better than how it went in ROTJ with Vader.

Luke--the OT Luke--had the most natural, believable growth of any character in the SW franchise, the very reason that version remains its defining story representative, and why TLJ is such an on-its-ear deviation from that natural growth.

No, he just wasn't a "Incorruptible can-do-no-wrong" Superman that OT fans were waiting for.
 
Are Star Trek reruns no longer playing on broadcast television? They are still available on Netflix, just not Discovery or any of the newer material.

The BBC channel shows TNG and Voyager episodes during the day. Also Netflix as you said and Amazon Prime have all the old shows and usually several of the movies the cycle out and back.
 
The BBC channel shows TNG and Voyager episodes during the day. Also Netflix as you said and Amazon Prime have all the old shows and usually several of the movies the cycle out and back.
The digital network Heroes & Icons shows all of the Star Trek series, except The Animated Series, Sunday-Friday nights. They actually did show TAS when the first started, it was big deal because I believe it was first time in decades anybody had shown it, but have since stopped.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I’ve seen TOS on MeTV.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Or maybe people just don't buy action figures at the grocery store? Don't forget, Amazon is a thing now.



Wedge is the only person to survive both Death Star attacks. He literally fires one of the shots that destroys the second Death Star. Wedge is awesome.

The Wedge character was so popular he's a lead/co lead character in many, many of the EU novels.
 
I'd say he's probably one of, if not the most popular supporting characters in the franchise.
 
Yeah, I'm still a little pissed he doesn't seem to be coming back for the Sequel Trilogy.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top