World Premiere/Advance screening discussions [SPOILERS GUARANTEED]

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That might be true, but DS9 and Voyager continued to be profitable for Paramount and are still earning a fair amount of money today. They might not have had TNG's popularity but that doesn't mean they weren't worth producing from an business point of view.

Both shows were losing viewers and had to be retooled to avoid being cancelled.

DS9 was threatened to be cancelled? This is news to me.

I have not heard that it was threatened with imminent cancellation. It is true that DS9 was retooled substantially in its fourth year because of the studio's concern with its continually dropping ratings. It's also true, according to Armin Shimmerman, that the actors did not expect to be offered a seventh season when their contracts ran out, due to the ratings. Obviously their pessimism was misplaced.

Are you sure Enterprise has been profitable? An episode cost 4 million to make and they made almost a 100 of those so thats 400 million invested. I'm not sure they have made all that much return on this one yet.

That's not 400 million invested with no return during the initial American network run - UPN's license fee repaid most of the production costs. These fees typically don't cover the entire cost of production, which is why most series don't turn a profit until syndication. Ever since TNG, however, Star Trek has also benefited from profitable merchandising licenses as well as foreign broadcast and video rights. Added to syndication and cable (where the show's done quite well) and DVD sales, Enterprise has made the studio good money - not TNG money, but then neither did DS9 or Voyager.

 

[Jefferies]

^^Thanks for the clarification that was my understanding aswell.

 

[Meredith]

http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

There is a flash on here that explains how there can be multiple dimensions.

Creating other time lines could be also a result of what TYPE of time travel is used.

 

[Lazerlike42]

Let me put it this way, if I may. We have all had a friend for decades. We got to spend time with him 700 times over the years, making new memories. In between visits, we still had the memories of times spent together. There was always the hope of seeing him again, too, but it diminished as time went on. Then in 2009, we heard that our old friend was stopping by to make new memories with us, and we were all excited. In the end, it turned out that our old friend didn't come back. Instead, he sent someone that was very similar to him. We can now spend time with this person, and get to know him and have some fun and make new memories - but we'll never get to see that old friend again, and we have only memories.

For some of us, this is deeply saddening, and for some of us, we're so hurt by this new fellow who's trying to be our friend but just isn't, that we don't want much to do with him. It would be one thing if he came along as the different person that he is and we liked him. It's another entirely for him to try to duplicate that old friend we once knew.

Or you could just, you know, go visit your old friend. He's still alive after all.

The point of my analogy was that all that exists of the old friend is memories. No new experiences can be had - just remembering the old ones. That's the sad thing.

 

[StCoop]

The point of my analogy was that all that exists of the old friend is memories. No new experiences can be had - just remembering the old ones. That's the sad thing.

And what new Star Trek featuring the original cast was there going to be?

 

[urbandk]

The point of my analogy was that all that exists of the old friend is memories. No new experiences can be had - just remembering the old ones. That's the sad thing.

And what new Star Trek featuring the original cast was there going to be?

Dude, Star Trek XII: So Very Tired!

 

[thumbtack]

We understand that it still exists. The point is that for all intents and purposes, it's dead. There will never be another story told in that timeline. It's over and done with, relegated to fanfic and novels. While it still exists, it does only as a memory of what once was.

I'm sure those in deep denial will figure out some way to pretend this is not a reboot. You can see some people doing it right now. I wish there was a way to skip over those posts, though. I'd rather just look forward to Star Trek 2 with this same cast and crew, and hopefully the same glowing reviews.

 

[Lazerlike42]

The point of my analogy was that all that exists of the old friend is memories. No new experiences can be had - just remembering the old ones. That's the sad thing.

And what new Star Trek featuring the original cast was there going to be?

I don't know where this idea that the new cast is the problem has come from. I have already specifically denied that. Honestly, it comes across like a straw man that is being se up by those who can't respond to the actual criticisms that have been made of the film.

Let me explain it this way: in the analogy, the old friend is Star Trek. The time spent with him are the new episodes and films - the new experiences. The memories are the DVDs and the re-runs... they are going back over previous experiences.

All that remains of the old friend are the memories. There will be no new experiences. There can be new experiences, new stories, with this "new" Star Trek - the new versions of the characters that haven't been through all the things we remember, but never again will we have new experiences with the prime universe characters.

 

[FarDreaming]

I think that what some of the people here that are trying to say that the prime universe still exists for us, don't realize that some of us wanted to have the adventures continue in a way that we didn't have to go back to Prime but could embrace the new. I dearly wanted to embrace this new movie, include it in my Trek, only to find that I can't do that any longer because of events that happen in this movie. It rather becomes like looking in the window of the candy store and seeing others inside having a great time that you don't have the heart to join in.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

They're still Kirk and Spock and McCoy.

 

[Franklin]

All that remains of the old friend are the memories. There will be no new experiences. There can be new experiences, new stories, with this "new" Star Trek - the new versions of the characters that haven't been through all the things we remember, but never again will we have new experiences with the prime universe characters.

I understand what you're saying, they could've told a story about Kirk and the others in the "prime" universe. But they didn't. Those characters lived out their lives and the events of that universe led to the new one. The prime universe existed as it did and everything in that universe led up to the moment Nero (and Spock) get thrown into that black hole. There is no time paradox or anything like that going on here.

The thing to remember here is Orci and Kurtzman looked at time travel in a different way than Trek typically has. Orci in his (now famous?) interview about quantum physics tried to explain it. Nero being thrown back in time didn't change anything, it created a new thing. Those most affected by what happened will have the most different lives from the prime timeline (or any other timeline not contaminated by Nero). Nero and Spock are trapped in this timeline. Even if they go back to the 24th century, it would be the 24th century of this timeline, not the prime one.

The odd thing is this "multidimensional" theory of timelines and universes and such has a growing number of critics in physics these days. Something about how a theory of infinite timelines with infinite possibilities with supposed answers for everything raises questions about its falsifiability. In other words, the theory is untestable. Or, as one put it, a theory that answers everything answers nothing. That's the best I grasped it (and can remember) listening to some physicists on NPR a few days back.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Casually throwing something that's served for 40 years out the window in favor of something "shiny, sexy and kewl" is far from being an admirable thing.

It also is not what is going to happen here, as has been said for about a thousand times over the last year and about 50 times in this thread alone.

IN EFFECT it is, as has been said about a thoushandtimes over the last year and who knows how many times in this thread alone.

What do YOU say the chances are of any interest in Adams-Trek spawning any new material filmed for the Roddenberry-Trek universe?

 

[Ayelbourne]

The odd thing is this "multidimensional" theory of timelines and universes and such has a growing number of critics in physics these days. Something about how a theory of infinite timelines with infinite possibilities with supposed answers for everything raises questions about its falsifiability. In other words, the theory is untestable. Or, as one put it, a theory that answers everything answers nothing. That's the best I grasped it (and can remember) listening to some physicists on NPR a few days back.

Yeah, but at least, thinking about it that way doesn't cause any headaches.

What do YOU say the chances are of any interest in Adams-Trek spawning any new material filmed for the Roddenberry-Trek universe?

I don't know and frankly I don't care. I'm quite satisfied with how our regular Trek timeline is continued by Pocket Books.
Have you read the Destiny trilogy? It's awesome and really shakes up the status quo of the galaxy.

You said it yourself, it's not likely that those books are going to get contradicted by any show or movie in the future.
Might as well consider the books as part of my own "canon" (for lack of a better term) then.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Hey, I'm just trying to explain the other side of the arguement here...you want to talk about unwarranted senses of superiority you should look in the mirror (you being "new" fans).

I've been watching Star Trek for thirty years. In what way am I a "new" fan?

You're propounding their arguement. I can only assume that you are therefore in their camp.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

You could be right. At the same time though, I can't help but look at all these alterations to Trek and be reminded of that stupid Brand New Day storyline in recent Spider-Man comics where Peter and Mary Jane's marriage was erased from continuity.

And which has resulted in the best run of Spider-Man comics in several decades.

In your opinion, one emphatically not shared by the "old school" Spidey fans.

Marvel comics is another good example of the contempt the "new" fans (led by Joey "The Dark Lord of the Suck) Quesada) have for the exisiting fanbase.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Casually throwing something that's served for 40 years out the window in favor of something "shiny, sexy and kewl" is far from being an admirable thing.

That's been the American way of doing things for years.

Although I do understand what you're saying. I go back to watching TOS in first run. However, it's happening, and I'm going to enjoy it best I can. Call it paying homage to what's gone before while creating a true "next generation" of Star Trek. And, even if we allow ourselves the guilty pleasure of liking the movie, we'll still know "our" Trek was better. Like the Beatles compared to what these "kids" listen to today.

I know, and that's pretty much my policy too. But I can't hold myself back when the "new school" fans pull out the "everything that came before us is old/obsolete/worn out/cheesy/etc" line to justify looking down their noses at us.

BTW: Beatles? GAHHHH! To quote the great prophet of Rock (Dee Snyder): "If it's not Metal, IT'S CRAP!"

 

[OneBuckFilms]

This is a Reboot without being a reboot, using Quantum Physics to explain how.

If Star Trek is to begin again, this is probably the best way to do it.

 

[BolianAuthor]

All that remains of the old friend are the memories. There will be no new experiences. There can be new experiences, new stories, with this "new" Star Trek - the new versions of the characters that haven't been through all the things we remember, but never again will we have new experiences with the prime universe characters.

I understand what you're saying, they could've told a story about Kirk and the others in the "prime" universe. But they didn't. Those characters lived out their lives and the events of that universe led to the new one. The prime universe existed as it did and everything in that universe led up to the moment Nero (and Spock) get thrown into that black hole. There is no time paradox or anything like that going on here.

The thing to remember here is Orci and Kurtzman looked at time travel in a different way than Trek typically has. Orci in his (now famous?) interview about quantum physics tried to explain it. Nero being thrown back in time didn't change anything, it created a new thing. Those most affected by what happened will have the most different lives from the prime timeline (or any other timeline not contaminated by Nero). Nero and Spock are trapped in this timeline. Even if they go back to the 24th century, it would be the 24th century of this timeline, not the prime one.

The odd thing is this "multidimensional" theory of timelines and universes and such has a growing number of critics in physics these days. Something about how a theory of infinite timelines with infinite possibilities with supposed answers for everything raises questions about its falsifiability. In other words, the theory is untestable. Or, as one put it, a theory that answers everything answers nothing. That's the best I grasped it (and can remember) listening to some physicists on NPR a few days back.

Orci's interpretation of time is pretty dead-on... my problem with JJ "rebooting" Trek, is that there is NO reason at all to do anything new with the TOS cast or time period. We've all seen the events of that time, and followed those characters long enough. Same for the 24th century.

If JJ really wanted us to "forget everything we know", or whatever bullshit line he used, he should have TRULY started out fresh and new... show us a new ship, at the dawn of the 25th century, with new characters, that explores a whole new galaxy! No more Klingons, Romulans, Vulcans, or Borg... all new, all fresh, and still 100% Star Trek.

But no, he didn't want to show us anything fresh and new... he just wanted to recycle tired old characters that we've already known for 40+ years, pitifully assuming he had something new to offer us.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Orci's interpretation of time is pretty dead-on... my problem with JJ "rebooting" Trek, is that there is NO reason at all to do anything new with the TOS cast or time period. We've all seen the events of that time, and followed those characters long enough. Same for the 24th century.

That's only true if your aim is to please a few million hard-core trekkies.

There is no reason at all for Paramount to invest tens of millions of dollars, much less hundreds of millions, in the effort to create the upteenth group of knock-off Trek characters to anchor a new incarnation of Trek. They have a great big parking lot in the middle of the lot that they could pile all that money up on and set it ablaze if they're that eager to lose it.

Starting over with Kirk and Spock is the only way to go, really, if you want to grab a big audience again.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

If JJ really wanted us to "forget everything we know", or whatever bullshit line he used, he should have TRULY started out fresh and new... show us a new ship, at the dawn of the 25th century, with new characters, that explores a whole new galaxy! No more Klingons, Romulans, Vulcans, or Borg... all new, all fresh, and still 100% Star Trek.

There's a segment of fandom that truly believes that, say, the adventures of Captain Miller aboard the Enterprise G in the 25th Century who's using his axolinear computer and his singularity torpedos to fight the Zürgg menace while waiting for his turn to use the holodome is "all new" and "all fresh". I don't agree. Star Trek doesn't need new 3d meshes and new technobabble. What we're getting sounds much fresher than any idea I've ever read in the "Future of Trek" forum.