Actually I heard the DVD of the old stuff were selling more since Trek XI came out.
Impact on the Franchise
- Thread starter AJ86
- Start date
Actually I heard the DVD of the old stuff were selling more since Trek XI came out.
So, despite there actually being a future for Star Trek when there wasn't one before, it's still dead?
Erm...okay.
Erm...okay.
Timing is iffy on whether you can credit NuTrek for those sales, or just the fact that the movies finally moved from HDDVD to BluRay and enjoyed that spike. After all, the regular DVDs of the shows and movies were pretty stale product at that point.
Note, this is just proof of lack of evidence, not the same thing as saying 'definitely not'.
It doesn't add crap. You could have taken out any mention of an alternate reality and it wouldn't have made a difference at all. If they wanted it to add anything, they would have done something with it. The whole concept that this is how time travel works also violates the entire point of a lot of previous time travel episodes. In Yesterday's Enterprise, Guinan didn't travel through realities, she was still in the same reality where events transpired differently. The entire storyline wasn't about trying to find their way back into the original reality, but restore the reality they were already in.
Riker: But that's what you're talking about, isn't it? Altering the past?
Picard: We're talking about restoring the past.
Well, if they're in an alternate reality where the original timeline is still intact, than why was Guinan sensing that something was wrong? She didn't travel through the rift into an alternate reality because there was no traveling through alternate realities where the original time line was intact.
Again, the movie is not the entire franchise. Also, what killed Trek wasn't that 'people didn't like Star Trek' anymore, but that Voyager and Enterprise were stale and smelled like an Egyptian Tomb.
I remember when "Batman and Robin" bombed that the 'powers that be' said, flatly, people didn't want to see Batman movies anymore. The truth was, of course, they just didn't want to see bad movies anymore. Star Trek, by the time Voyager and Enterprise wrapped, was in the same camp. And, as "Batman Begins" proved, some new blood and new direction was needed.
That said, the movie itself was entertaining and did well, but it wasn't something that you could hang a franchise on. It was a glorious popcorn movie. That means that most people didn't look beyond the movie itself and into the franchise. The movie did well, but the brand as a whole has not recovered.
Jeyel said:
Then call it a retcon. Or throw out your "erased from history" DVDs.
Uhura: "An alternate reality?"
Spock: "Precisely. Whatever our lives might have been, if the time continuum was disrupted, our destinies have changed."
They excused themselves from TOS continuity. Later...
Spock Prime: "I implied that universe-ending paradoxes would ensue should he break his promise."
Spock: "You lied."
A vague comment to the effect that universes don't end?
Vance said:
What did you expect? Sales of TNG books to skyrocket? A new TV series to be announced (which, seeing how SGU is doing, would be a very bad idea)? Paramount will go with what makes the most money, and right now that's movies. The fact that Trek has any future at all means things are better for the franchise than they were in 2005. Depending on how the next movie(s) fare, anything can happen.
I came with no expectations. I merely answered the question. No single movie as the sole new-product, regardless of the quality of that movie, would resuscitate the franchise. This movie was not now, nor was it ever, a franchise-building effort. It was, is, and will-be, just about the movie itself. That's the way that Paramount currently wants to play it.
Nonsense. If this movie hadn't been made, something else would have come along, another road taken, another project approved. The "Death of Star Trek" has been the only consistent meme in the franchise since 1966. Hell, it started with that meme, way back with "The Cage".
The new movie practically is the franchise now.
I can't really cede that point (there ARE aspects of Star Trek that are doing okay overall, just not the juggernaut it once was). Realistically, it seems like Star Trek is now two franchises, with the handlers of NuTrek making damn sure that it stays that way for the time being.
Or how about I throw out this movie and pretend that didn't happen? That sort of thing does work in Star Trek from time to time. Heck, even real Trek writers will retcon some stories out of existence. Star Trek VI certainly flows much better as a follow up to IV rather than V, and discounting Threshold is just common sense. At least I'd be in the franchise that still has characters from Deep Space Nine and had the best portrayal of the original crew. All you'll be stuck with is Enterprise.
Err...you do whatever you want. I'll just happily enjoy my entire Star Trek DVD collection without any of that "X happened but Y didn't" nonsense.
I heard that, too. But where are the actual numbers to support that?
Abrams is not currently under contract to make a third. He was not even under contract to make a second until this time last year. This could be his last Trek, or he could do 10 more.
This "trilogy" nonsense is a combination of wishful thinking on the part of a few, and the standard "this movie + 2" contract that Hollywood has its actors sign nowadays.
In my case, it's more the latter than the former. This is largely because Hollywood wants to 'keep things sexy' and think that properties hitting around 10 years of age need a hard reset so they can hire the 'young and sexy' cast again.
I don't believe there were any sales spikes that could even be attributed to TOS-R or the BluRay releases.
So the next movie will again save the franchise, I assume. Because if it fails, the "franchise is dead" again.
number6
Vice Admiral
If the next movie isn't good, the chances of Paramount making another one soon is slim, just like any film franchise..
Whether you like it or not, nuTrek is the future of Star Trek at this point. I can sympathize with both viewpoints about the merits or lack thereof in the last movie, but the fact of the matter is that Abrams version of star Trek is the ONLY thing keeping trek alive at this point. If he were to quit Star Trek tmrw, I can almost guarentee that there will not be another Star Trek film or TV series again for at least a decade as long as Paramount CBS owns the franchise rights unless someone buys it from them to do something with it. From Paramount CBS' point of view, ENT fans were lucky that they got a comeplete final season. If ENT was any other show, they would have been canceled mid 2nd season. The way Star Trek is viewed is that it's a small number of dedicated loyal fans who will follow anything with the Star Trek name attached to it but overall, there's no breakout potential in the franchise anymore to gain a large audience. They're busy looking for the next Glee, American Idol, CSI, or Law and Order to spend even two seconds thinking about Star Trek.
Similar threads
