• 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!

The Outsider Who Saved Star Trek

I thought you were talking about Abrams, since he saved Star Trek. :o

If I wanted some piss on this thread I'd've poured a Budweiser.
I'm not pissing on this thread, I'm simply suggesting that the title is somewhat misleading. One who wasn't even born when TWOK was made wouldn't know of Meyer. Thinking that the thread is about Abrams is a logical assumption.

Oh come on. It'd be in the abrams forum, not this one. You're as bad as RAMA with his dropping box office figures into every thread like he has to mark territory.
 
Meyer and Nimoy were using only one event that already happened that being Chernobyl, but predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union months before it happened is what I was refering too and doing that sort of thing is true sci-fi tradition (they filmed and then debuted "The Undiscovered Country" in December of 1991 well before the final collapse of the USSR which didn't occur until the months of July and August of that same year) also predicting the coup attempt which was one of the themes in TUC is another example of a sci-fi predicting events before they would happen.

the wall started being torn down November 9 of 1989.

Don't dig yourself in any deeper.

Where did I mention the Berlin Wall as being predicted? I am talking about the collapse of the Soviet Union ya dork, pay attention, inspiration for the film came from past events Chernobyl and the Berlin Wall, yes I have already acknowledged that, but, where they took the film by predicting the collapse of the USSR (the end of the Klingon Empire), the assassination attempt on Yeltsin during the failed August coup (The assasinatioin of Gorkon) is what I am referring too.

Well where do you date the collapse from? I've been trying to be kind, but you're trying to make something seem like a good prediction when it is just mirroring what has already happened, and it just makes you seem ill-informed. Christ I have been trying to help your thread, not fuck it up like the other guy.Skip it.
 
Oh come on. It'd be in the abrams forum, not this one. You're as bad as RAMA with his dropping box office figures into every thread like he has to mark territory.
This is a forum about Star Trek movies, is it not? Last time I checked the Star Trek movie was about Star Trek. Hence the name.
 
This is all getting blown way out of proportion. I thought all there was to trevanian's comment was just a smart alec quip about how this thread couldn't possibly be about Abrams because trevanian isn't a fan of the new Star Trek movie (hence the suggestion that calling Abrams Star Trek's saviour would be 'pissing' on the thread).

First Disillusion simply didn't seem to get the joke, and now there seems to be this unnecessary argument going on over semantics. I'm not a mod, but I'd just like to say come on, guys...let's ditch this petty nitpicking and get back on topic.

I think if this thread were about Abrams, it could have been started here or in the forum for the new Star Trek movie and it would be in an appropriate place either way (there is some talk of the new movie here, mostly regarding how it measures up against the others quality-wise), but it doesn't matter.
 
the wall started being torn down November 9 of 1989.

Don't dig yourself in any deeper.

Where did I mention the Berlin Wall as being predicted? I am talking about the collapse of the Soviet Union ya dork, pay attention, inspiration for the film came from past events Chernobyl and the Berlin Wall, yes I have already acknowledged that, but, where they took the film by predicting the collapse of the USSR (the end of the Klingon Empire), the assassination attempt on Yeltsin during the failed August coup (The assasinatioin of Gorkon) is what I am referring too.

Well where do you date the collapse from? I've been trying to be kind, but you're trying to make something seem like a good prediction when it is just mirroring what has already happened, and it just makes you seem ill-informed. Christ I have been trying to help your thread, not fuck it up like the other guy.Skip it.

I actually did give a date, July of '91 was when the failed coup occurred and August was when Yeltsin formed the Republic, one of my old posts mentions this.
 
First Disillusion simply didn't seem to get the joke, and now there seems to be this unnecessary argument going on over semantics. I'm not a mod, but I'd just like to say come on, guys...let's ditch this petty nitpicking and get back on topic.
You are right. Let's get back ontopic. :bolian:
 
More like the outsider who almost KILLED it. We go from The Motion Picture, filled with awe, real sci fi and interesting ideas to a moustache twirling villain, cheap production design and explosions. Not to mention the worst uniforms ever. And because this movie was made on the cheap (and trust me, it looks it) and made a profit, every film afterwards looks equally cheap and every film has to have its Khan ripoff.

This movie took the exploration out of Star Trek and opted for explosions. And cheapness.
 
More like the outsider who almost KILLED it. We go from The Motion Picture, filled with awe, real sci fi and interesting ideas to a moustache twirling villain, cheap production design and explosions. Not to mention the worst uniforms ever. And because this movie was made on the cheap (and trust me, it looks it) and made a profit, every film afterwards looks equally cheap and every film has to have its Khan ripoff.

This movie took the exploration out of Star Trek and opted for explosions. And cheapness.

You are in the minority on this opinion of 'Wrath, most people going into the theaters in '81 to see 'Wrath were under the impression that this was going to be the last Trek film and came away from it surprised and happy, financially it was a great success and emotionally was the reason people came to see "Search For Spock", and later "Voyage Home".

As far as accusing Meyer of being cheap he wasn't the one responsible for the budget Paramount was the force that pushed Bennet to save money on this film since "Motion Picture" production was was a near disaster, they spent a huge some of money on "Motion Picture" and fired the first special company effects after seeing their terrible work, which was very late into production by then, hired a new company spent more money, barely finished the film which was cut without the exterior shots of V'Ger and without Robert Wise being able to do his own final editing of the film, which, without his touches gave us a very slow, very dry, very boring, and lifeless film (even Wise said his DVD directors cut was much better). "The Motion Picture" was a disapointment to Trekkies and Trekkers at the time, who were happy to at least get some new Trek, which is the only reason it was successful at all since they had a ten year dry spell of no Trek at all but re-runs!

Star Trek II had life in it, it had character, the only complaint that I feel is legit is recycling an old TV character Khan, but Montalban's great performance helped thanks to the directing given by Meyer more than made up for that in my opinion.

Star Trek II was originally going to be the last Star Trek film, and the last Star Trek anything you were going to see. Meyer saved Trek, he is a good director an a very intelligent writer, his books were very good especially his Sherlock Holmes books, have you ever read "The Seven-Percent Solution"? It is a great book very well written, well worded, and a well thought book, only Meyer's can bring together two intellectual giants in Sherlock Holmes and Sigmund Frued and to do it in such a way that it doesn't end up dry and boring takes a very smart, very sharp writer who has knowledge of history culture and modern writing.

Wreck Star Trek? Meyers is the standard for good Star Trek! You may not like 'Wrath but you should be thanking Meyer for having any Star Trek at all today.
 
You are in the minority on this opinion of 'Wrath, most people going into the theaters in '81 to see 'Wrath were under the impression that this was going to be the last Trek film and came away from it surprised and happy, financially it was a great success and emotionally was the reason people came to see "Search For Spock", and later "Voyage Home".
Uh. Source?
 
You are in the minority on this opinion of 'Wrath, most people going into the theaters in '81 to see 'Wrath were under the impression that this was going to be the last Trek film and came away from it surprised and happy, financially it was a great success and emotionally was the reason people came to see "Search For Spock", and later "Voyage Home".
Uh. Source?

Source for which, your being vague! I am not going to right a shotgun response full of sources for everything I said so please be specific, what point do you require a source for?
 
I still say the outsider who really saved Star Trek was the syndication scheduler. Think about it. Seriously. When you watched it in syndication, what time and day of the week was it? What was it scheduled against? What is the aspect that is most credited with killing Star Trek's original run?

I wish I could remember his name... Star Trek was lucky he liked it or saw it's potential and bought the syndication under the (then) usual minimum number of episodes for syndication. But his scheduling is what kept Star Trek going and ultimately giving it a life of it's own. There wouldn't have been ANY movies without him, much less any more series.
 
You are in the minority on this opinion of 'Wrath, most people going into the theaters in '81 to see 'Wrath were under the impression that this was going to be the last Trek film and came away from it surprised and happy, financially it was a great success and emotionally was the reason people came to see "Search For Spock", and later "Voyage Home".
Uh. Source?

Source for which, your being vague! I am not going to right a shotgun response full of sources for everything I said so please be specific, what point do you require a source for?
Oh, stop evading. He quoted the specific chunk of your message that he wanted a source for: your assertion that most people thought TWOK was going to be the last Trek film. He was neither vague nor asking too much.
 
Uh. Source?

Source for which, your being vague! I am not going to right a shotgun response full of sources for everything I said so please be specific, what point do you require a source for?
Oh, stop evading. He quoted the specific chunk of your message that he wanted a source for: your assertion that most people thought TWOK was going to be the last Trek film. He was neither vague nor asking too much.

Actually I was thinking he was talking about people coming away happy about the film, so I didn't know, nor was I evading, jeez!
 
I still say the outsider who really saved Star Trek was the syndication scheduler. Think about it. Seriously. When you watched it in syndication, what time and day of the week was it? What was it scheduled against? What is the aspect that is most credited with killing Star Trek's original run?
Good point. And those who had the nerve to buy the episodes for syndication on foreign channels, as well. Or it still wouldn't really have caught on outside the US.
 
As to who do I quote as a source, you can ask Leonard Nimoy and look up Gene Roddenberry interviews, you can ask anyone who was alive during that time who watched the film "Wrath of Khan" 'hey-was Star Trek II expected to be the last film?' and don't just ask anyone ask a Trekkie/Trekker because it was a common conception in '81, you can find it in "Beam Me Up, Scotty: Star Trek's "Scotty" In His Own Words" (the James Doohan biography) and "To the Stars: The Autobiography of George Takei, Star Trek's Mr. Sulu". They both state that Star Trek III was a surprise to them since II was supposed to be it, especially with Spock dying in II.
 
I still say the outsider who really saved Star Trek was the syndication scheduler. Think about it. Seriously. When you watched it in syndication, what time and day of the week was it? What was it scheduled against? What is the aspect that is most credited with killing Star Trek's original run?

I wish I could remember his name... Star Trek was lucky he liked it or saw it's potential and bought the syndication under the (then) usual minimum number of episodes for syndication. But his scheduling is what kept Star Trek going and ultimately giving it a life of it's own. There wouldn't have been ANY movies without him, much less any more series.

Star Trek was going to get a second chance at TV with "Star Trek: Phase II" but then when "Star Wars" came out in '77 the exec's at Paramount were asking themselves 'what do we have that we canturn into a film, and of course they had Roddenberry's Star Trek, so really you can also thank George Lucas too. There would be no big budget film for Trek without Wars paviing the way.
 
I still say the outsider who really saved Star Trek was the syndication scheduler. Think about it. Seriously. When you watched it in syndication, what time and day of the week was it? What was it scheduled against? What is the aspect that is most credited with killing Star Trek's original run?
Good point. And those who had the nerve to buy the episodes for syndication on foreign channels, as well. Or it still wouldn't really have caught on outside the US.
That would be a timing issue... if it was already doing well in syndication in the US, the "nerve" wouldn't be so large for foreign markets. If they bought the rights at the same time this guy did, that would be a lot of nerve.

My big point is that he bought it and scheduled it for 6:00pm every weekday in the states on the syndication channel(s). The only other competition was the news on the big three channels (ABC, NBC, CBS). (I wonder how many here put up with Gilligan's Island or the Brady Bunch while waiting for Trek to come on? *grin*)

Thanks to that, Star Trek got far more coverage than it ever could have (or did) on "prime time." A vast majority of the current (TOS) fans got hooked because of that scheduling (us original airing "hookies" are a minority). The popularity of Star Trek took off because of him, instead of dying a typical TV show obscurity death.

I think his name & story is in the Solow/Justman Trek book? (which is not accessible here at this moment).
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top