Is the great rift repairable?

[Lynx]

Hate fest? The movie was a critical and commercial success. And people involved with the original series, from Nimoy on down, have embraced the film. I don't see a "great rift" at all.

It seems to be that the hate-fest is in a small minority, rather than majority who loved the film.

Maybe those who loved the film is in the majority because many of those who didn't like it doesn't bother to post here or voice there opinion anymore. They have left.

 

[DonIago]

In my experience it tends to work the other way...people who aren't happy about something talk about it more than people who are happy with it.

 

[bismarck_1892]

Hate fest? The movie was a critical and commercial success. And people involved with the original series, from Nimoy on down, have embraced the film. I don't see a "great rift" at all.

It seems to be that the hate-fest is in a small minority, rather than majority who loved the film.

Maybe those who loved the film is in the majority because many of those who didn't like it doesn't bother to post here or voice there opinion anymore. They have left.

I think it may just depends on the particular message board.

Even though I disagree with a good number of views here, I like the good (and often amazingly enough polite) argument one can get here. So, I like to post here. I haven't posted on the subject of Star Trek in a long while though actually because (as you say) I didn't enjoy the film. But that's just me.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Maybe those who loved the film is in the majority because many of those who didn't like it doesn't bother to post here or voice there opinion anymore. They have left.

That's observably not true.

If it were - so what? By every means of measurement, the acceptance-versus-rejection ratio for this film is about nine in favor to one against, amongst hard core fans.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

"Old Trek" stopped being commercially viable not because it was somehow inherently deficient. But because it was run into the ground by lack of imagination and creativity.

So you say.

I say you're wrong.

In either event, the operative phrase there is "'Old Trek' stopped being commercially viable."

 

[bismarck_1892]

Maybe those who loved the film is in the majority because many of those who didn't like it doesn't bother to post here or voice there opinion anymore. They have left.

That's observably not true.

If it were - so what? By every means of measurement, the acceptance-versus-rejection ratio for this film is about nine in favor to one against, amongst hard core fans.

I doubt we would agree on the matter.

Curious though, where can I see the statistic? And how do the statistics differentiate between hardcore fans and non-hardcore fans? (If its polls done on this message board then never mind.)

 

[Char Aznable]

The haters of XI keep harping on about how this new movie only appealed to the general public and that the hardcore fans didn't like it. If that were so, then why is it that I can't find too many people who dislike the new movie outside this here message board (all ten of you)? Literally only one person I know IRL didn't like the new Star Trek. Everyone else I know said it was the most suprisingly fun film of the summer and some even decided to check out older Trek.

Also, anyone who actually got offended by the, "this is not your father's Star Trek," promo bits is a fucking idiot worthy of contempt. Get over yourselves now.

 

[Squiggy]

However, I must add that annoying the old fans and losing them is definitely not a good idea. I doubt that the new fans are as loyal and die-hearted as many of the old fans.

If the studio isn't making enough money off of them to continue production it doesn't matter how loyal the few determined loyalists are. What's definitely not a good idea is pandering to them when they're few enough and far enough out of the mainstream to be discounted. Losing them can't hurt a bit if they're not doing you any good.

Maybe, but they have watched loyally and diligently all these years.

They also started to...ya know...die. You have to replinish the coffers every so often. Going by your logic, these "talkies" are just a fad.

Bought the merchandise and drank the cool aid. There is not that few of them.

Actually, there is...that's why Nemesis flopped and Enterprise was canceled.

They made the studio a lot of money.

Not enough. If that were the case, we'd have a movie where we finally found out that Data was successfully transferred to B4 and Enty-D and Titan team up to defeat another alien whose forehead looks like a vagina.

Shows like these (sci-fi) will always depend on the loyalists because they are ultimately not for the "general" public consumption.

Star Trek: $385,494,555.
Nemesis: $67,312,826

Star Trek is still for many a "geeky" show/movie to watch.

I have 385,494,555 reasons why you're wrong.

Ultimately, I believe, the fall of Trek TV correlates to the fall in the shows quality rather than pandering to the fringe or any other excuse.

Well, that's certainly one reason. Desperately holding on to a failing business model is another. You're sounding like a telegraph salesman in the 1920s.

Understandably, there is never enough money for the studio.

Which is why Star Trek (2012) was greenlighted (greenlit?) as the movie premiered.

And really, that's what its all about. But attempting to sell the franchise to everyone will result in no one buying it.

And in this universe where the movie flopped, was Voyager a critical success?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That's true but I can't recall a previous Trek production that deliberatly said that it was not intended for the existing fanbase. "Not your father's Star Trek" indeed.

Nu BSG. Olmos flat out said it at a big press conference, cutting off Bonnie's PR spin at the knees.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

"Old Trek" stopped being commercially viable not because it was somehow inherently deficient. But because it was run into the ground by lack of imagination and creativity.

So you say.

I say you're wrong.

In either event, the operative phrase there is "'Old Trek' stopped being commercially viable."

The difference is in how to fix it, Dennis, and you know it.

To use an analogy: you own a car that runs out of gas and stops running one day. Do you go out and buy a NEW car or do you put gas in the tank?

09 Trek is 4th most popular (general audience) in terms of rank for it's year, beaten by TMP, TWOK, and TVH. It is #1 in inflation adjusted N Am gross, beating TMP by ~$2 million, and the next nearest film TVH by ~$48 million.

 

[Squiggy]

To use an analogy: you own a car that runs out of gas and stops running one day. Do you go out and buy a NEW car or do you put gas in the tank?

Did the car run out of gas because you forgot to fill it up or because there's a massive hole in the fuel line and the car is so old and busted that it would cost more to repair it than it's worth?

09 Trek is 4th most popular (general audience) in terms of rank for it's year, beaten by TMP, TWOK, and TVH. It is #1 in inflation adjusted N Am gross, beating TMP by ~$2 million, and the next nearest film TVH by ~$48 million.

He never said "Star Trek has never been successful". It was successful, then. In 2008, Star Trek was not successful and no other idea was deemed viable. The past couple of attempts at Trek failed...miserably.

Let's go back to your car analogy. Let's say you're running down the highway in a 40 year old car. You never really maintained it. You changed the oil every so often, but that's about it.

Chances are that when it stops, it's not simply because you ran out of gas.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, that's certainly one reason. Desperately holding on to a failing business model is another. You're sounding like a telegraph salesman in the 1920s.

Bingo!

He never said "Star Trek has never been successful". It was successful, then. In 2008, Star Trek was not successful and no other idea was deemed viable. The past couple of attempts at Trek failed...miserably.

Let's go back to your car analogy. Let's say you're running down the highway in a 40 year old car. You never really maintained it. You changed the oil every so often, but that's about it.

Chances are that when it stops, it's not simply because you ran out of gas.

Exactly so.

Back in the 1950s and early 60s we loved Chevys. The kinds of thinking about Trek that are espoused by some of the oldTrek loyalists would have gone down very well in Detroit at GM or Chrysler over the last thirty years or so. At least Paramount didn't line up for a government bail-out in order to get Trek restarted.

At this point, it's not a negotiation between the remaining unhappy fans and the studio - Paramount replaced something that no longer worked commercially with something that's making them a lot of money and has big potential.

 

[kkozoriz1]

It's interesting how the biggest fans of XI refer to people who didn't like the movie as haters. I don't hate the movie. There's even parts that I like, that I think that they got right. But because I don't buy into everything about it I'm a hater.

There's quality and there's popularity. Sometimes they coincide. Sometimes they don't. Was Laverne & Shirley the BEST American TV show for two years running (77-79)?

 

[Char Aznable]

It's interesting how the biggest fans of XI refer to people who didn't like the movie as haters. I don't hate the movie. There's even parts that I like, that I think that they got right. But because I don't buy into everything about it I'm a hater.

Good thing no one ever made that claim then.

There's quality and there's popularity. Sometimes they coincide. Sometimes they don't. Was Laverne & Shirley the BEST American TV show for two years running (77-79)?

To most people however, the new movie had both where it counted. People keep harping on about how XI's going to look dated in 10-20 years. Cuz, y'know, every single Trek production is utterly timeless and not at all a product of the decades they were made, right?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There's quality and there's popularity. Sometimes they coincide. Sometimes they don't.

And, oddly enough, the distinction is just about never brought except in defense of something that most people don't like.

Abrams's Trek movie does not suffer by comparison with most of oldTrek where "quality" is concerned.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Is there a site that list Nielsen rating for the various Trek episodes? I'd like to see which are the best ones.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That was a swing and a miss.

 

[kkozoriz1]

There's quality and there's popularity. Sometimes they coincide. Sometimes they don't. Was Laverne & Shirley the BEST American TV show for two years running (77-79)?

To most people however, the new movie had both where it counted. People keep harping on about how XI's going to look dated in 10-20 years. Cuz, y'know, every single Trek production is utterly timeless and not at all a product of the decades they were made, right?

Hmmm, even reading between the lines I don't see where I said it was going to look dated. TOS looks dated. TNG looks dated. Everything looks dated since it's a product of it's time.

 

[bismarck_1892]

Also, anyone who actually got offended by the, "this is not your father's Star Trek," promo bits is a fucking idiot worthy of contempt. Get over yourselves now.

So much for the "politeness" I mentioned before.

Unfortunately, rather then becoming interesting this conversation has fallen into the same unintelligeble none-sense as alway when no good argument can be put forward.

 

[Char Aznable]

Hmmm, even reading between the lines I don't see where I said it was going to look dated. TOS looks dated. TNG looks dated. Everything looks dated since it's a product of it's time.

I wasn't refering specifically to anything you said in particular. However, the claim that the new movie is inferior since it won't hold up in the future is one that is made by more then one detractor. I brought it up here as that, "point," is one that especially makes me go . Sorry for the confusion.

So much for the "politeness" I mentioned before.

I apologize if you're offended by my opinion, but that's honestly how I feel. I haven't seen a single person who was bothered by XI's campaign of, "not your father's Star Trek," (which wasn't even on that long BTW) who wasn't already looking for things to complain about. Confused Matthew is one well known example. Really, it says more about them and how afraid they are that Star Trek isn't some exclusive club just for them then it does about the ad itself (which is effectively trying to say that Star Trek can be for you too).