A TOS resurgence?

[Vger23]

Ouch...



Khan's blood?

Just to add my 0.02 $ here, but the latest product of a franchise mustn't necessary constitute "evolution" and "growth" in a postive sense.

This probably applied for NEM or the Star Wars prequels. I don't think either two added to the popularity of the franchises in a positive manner. In the case of Star Wars it's mostly the imaginative storytelling of the Clone Wars CGI animated series, that undoes some of the prequel damage, IMHO.

Bob

But that's solely your opinion based on your tastes and values. Who are you to judge whether something has advanced in a positive manner or not?

We are the ones who buy the tickets and watch the series, and that's what makes us the ones to judge. You might as well dismiss any criticism as entirely subjective and unworthy of consideration. This viewpoint, invoked by those who simply want to ignore inherent worth in evaluating nuTrek, results in nothing being good, and nothing being bad---a position hardly reflective of consensus reality, even when people can't reach consensus. One thing that most people do have consensus on is that there is good, and there is bad--and we are as fit to judge good and bad as many movie critics. More fit, because it's unlikely that any given movie critic is as steeped in the background material as we are.

Therefore this constant refrain of "that's your opinion," without any real answer to the opinion (because, as I think those who say/write that know, the opinion can't be cogently countered, and thus can only be dismissed in this airy fashion without real thought) is conveniently but unwarrantedly and nonsubstantively dismissive. As I wrote above, I think it's far more reasonable to dismiss as meaningless, divorced-from-reality speculation any opinions on alternate futures, ie, "Trek would be dead without Abrams." How can anyone know that? But we can know our own minds about Trek entries that exist in the present.

Yes, "we" are the ones that buy tickets. And, based on the ticket sales of the last two films, it seems "we" have spoken.

Again, there's no point in arguing. You've made up your mind and no amount of counter-points can ever change that. No amount of logic will change it.

And, it's not dismissive to say "that's only your opinion" when the only support you have to your argument is...well...YOUR OPINION. when you dismiss the only objective and relevant measures in the movie industry...what's left? Oh, yes, your opinion. Because the only measurable facts all indicate success and quality. Again, that doesn't mean you need to accept or buy into that that, but it DOES mean that you have been reduced to nothing more (and nothing less) than a man with an opinion.

Thanks for the discussion, but it's become redundant and pointless.

 

[BillJ]

My concern with him is that we'd get a lot of TNG/Berman-era continuity porn in any ST series produced by him. Plus, it opens up the possibility, however remote, of Brannon Braga slithering back into the ST fold in some capacity. I'll pass.

If I see the name 'Brannon Braga' associated with a new show in anyway, I'm out.

 

[Hober Mallow]

My concern with him is that we'd get a lot of TNG/Berman-era continuity porn in any ST series produced by him. Plus, it opens up the possibility, however remote, of Brannon Braga slithering back into the ST fold in some capacity. I'll pass.

If I see the name 'Brannon Braga' associated with a new show in anyway, I'm out.

I do have to give Braga props, though, for coining the term "continuity porn."

 

[Nerys Myk]

they gave Star Wars to JJ Abams , too. Is seems fans' opinions are irrelevant. But, I wonder who the so-called "general audiences" are. I dnt knw anyone.

The people who buy movie tickets and watch TV shows.

 

[Harvey]

The question of Star Trek's popularity during its initial NBC run is no longer open to debate. Marc Cushman's excellent three part book series, These Are The Voyages, (each book covers one season) has released the Nielsen rating for the entire TOS series to the public for the first time ever. The author had to pay a leasing fee in order to obtain the publishing rights to these ratings. What they reveal is that Star Trek consistently placed 1st or 2nd in it's time slot for at least the first two seasons (book three of These Are The Voyages has not yet been released). Also, Star Trek placed very well overall when ranked with all network shows airing at the time. In fact, when Star Trek premiered almost 47% of all televisions in America tuned in to see what all the hype was about. That was the highest rated episode of all, but once the rating leveled off, the show still did very well. Star Trek's poor ratings has been proven to be a myth.

Cushman cherry picks his data and fundamentally misunderstands several things about the business of television to reach this conclusion. If it makes you feel better about being a Star Trek fan, more power to you, but that doesn't mean his conclusions about the ratings have a bit of merit.

 

[Robert Comsol]

This probably applied for NEM or the Star Wars prequels. I don't think either two added to the popularity of the franchises in a positive manner. In the case of Star Wars it's mostly the imaginative storytelling of the Clone Wars CGI animated series, that undoes some of the prequel damage, IMHO.

But that's solely your opinion based on your tastes and values. Who are you to judge whether something has advanced in a positive manner or not?

Well, I followed the pricing for various Star Wars collectibles following the prequels and didn't notice a significant increase but rather a decrease. That should qualify as an objective indicator, IMHO.

Bob

 

[AtoZ]

^^ You are really stretching it. Abrams didn't save anything because a healthy interest still existed. Those films brought added interest, but that's it.

It saved the franchise as a whole because the last 2 movies made a combined $170 million at the WW box office, and JJs movies made $850 million. See how that works?

Curious. It saved the franchise as a whole? Reading your words drives home the point that TOS makes the studio money. THAT's why they got a brilliantine like JJ to helm THE Star Trek....the one that started it all.

In turn it brought in fans in droves, made a fortune and while doing so brought us back into the original ballpark - the one devoid of jumpsuits, a single man at the main helm/navigation console, endless ready room monologues and smug deliveries meant to underline "higher society".

For my money, the storytelling in TOS is of a richer, grander variety, without the sudden weak endings we became accustomed to in the late 80's and 90's. Sure, knock the ham-fisted approach Kirk and crew often seemed to have....but they didn't make my ears bleed or continuously resort to techno-babble to connect the dots. TOS was flawed in all of the right places. It was/is entertainment....and I dare submit it has held up better than those....all of those shows....that came after it.

THAT's why the bean counters at the studio decided to use TOS. Because it was the superior vehicle...and the profit seekers knew it would draw in the money that the others could not.

 

[Robert Comsol]

Last night I watched "Requiem for Methuselah" and was somewhat intrigued by the scene where Spock sits at the piano playing a waltz from Brahms while Kirk and Rayna were dancing to it. It's a very beautiful scene and unlike most of what we had seen in previous TOS episodes.

I then just wondered if such a scene were possible in one of the new movies. Apparently I lack the imagination to visualize that.

Bob

 

[Nerys Myk]

Last night I watched "Requiem for Methuselah" and was somewhat intrigued by the scene where Spock sits at the piano playing a waltz from Brahms while Kirk and Rayna were dancing to it. It's a very beautiful scene and unlike most of what we had seen in previous TOS episodes.

I then just wondered if such a scene were possible in one of the new movies. Apparently I lack the imagination to visualize that.

Bob

Of course it's possible.

 

[Robert Comsol]

Okay, I rephrase that: How likely is such a scene?

Bob

 

[Nerys Myk]

Okay, I rephrase that: How likely is such a scene?

Bob

The same as any other. It wasn't likely for TOS, until it was. ( As you pointed out)

 

[Hober Mallow]

The question of Star Trek's popularity during its initial NBC run is no longer open to debate.

You're right, it isn't: the show wasn't popular. Cushman's "facts" are highly dubious.

 

[Mudd]

What I love about the "commercial success isn't the most important measure of a film's success" crowd is that they rarely have anything to offer as an alternative other than "my taste is better grounded than your taste" - and, especially among fans of skiffy movies, that's a non-starter where any detachment (much less chimerical "objectivity") is concerned.

 

[albion432]

The question of Star Trek's popularity during its initial NBC run is no longer open to debate.

You're right, it isn't: the show wasn't popular. Cushman's "facts" are highly dubious.

Really!? I've enjoyed his first two book greatly. If you care to enlighten me, I would be interested in hearing more about the dubiousness of his "facts". I have found a few questionable facts in those books as well . . .

 

[BigJake]

Wow, it seems to really frustrate some people that they can't make other people like things by telling them a lot of other people liked that thing. It's almost like there could be some kind of fallacy inherent in their approach that they don't recognize.

And of course there's no other yardstick to a measure a film by other than box office! That's why nobody ever heard of box office flops like The Big Lebowski, Blade Runner, The Shawshank Redemption or The Wizard of Oz. It all makes sense. (At least, though, we can take comfort in the cultural legacy of well-regarded and totally-remembered classics like The Golden Child, Congo and Eraser, which thanks to their box office success now form cultural touchstones for entire nations and religious traditions.)

 

[Nerys Myk]

The question of Star Trek's popularity during its initial NBC run is no longer open to debate.

You're right, it isn't: the show wasn't popular. Cushman's "facts" are highly dubious.

Really!? I've enjoyed his first two book greatly. If you care to enlighten me, I would be interested in hearing more about the dubiousness of his "facts". I have found a few questionable facts in those books as well . . .

There are entire threads on the subject.

 

[albion432]

You're right, it isn't: the show wasn't popular. Cushman's "facts" are highly dubious.

Really!? I've enjoyed his first two books greatly. If you care to enlighten me, I would be interested in hearing more about the dubiousness of his "facts". I have found a few questionable facts in those books as well . . .

There are entire threads on the subject.

Oh, ok, thanks, I will look for it . . .

 

[Robert Comsol]

Okay, I rephrase that: How likely is such a scene?

Bob

The same as any other. It wasn't likely for TOS, until it was. ( As you pointed out)

I think there is still a difference. TOS established that Spock had an interest in various forms of music (obviously including a piano) and we'd seen some protagonists dancing ("The Squire of Gothos"), so essentially TOS told us that some "classic" forms of entertainment will still be cherished in the 23rd (and 24th Century).

Given the context of the new movies and since playing music or dancing don't exactly qualify as spectacle, I don't think we are going to see something like that in one of the upcoming movies.

Bob

 

[Warped9]

^^ I think the distinction between then and now is the mindset and experience brought to the writing and overall creative process. I agree it's a scene you could have seen in TNG, but highly unlikely to occur in something like JJtrek. Medium is significant, too. As long as Trek is done as feature film you will not likely get thoughtful, smaller scale stories as you would on television. The expectations of those footing the bill and the objectives of those producing are quite different.

And it's gotten worse. Although I greatly dislike the JJ films their financial success pretty much guarantees that any successive film treatments will follow the same model of going for a splashy, action laden and dumbed down approach with a pervasive adolescent mindset rather than an adult one. This is why I firmly believe for Star Trek to ever regain any of its previous glory it has to get back to television where it has the freedom to tell the variety of stories it was meant for.

 

[Tallguy]

I think there is still a difference. TOS established that Spock had an interest in various forms of music (obviously including a piano) and we'd seen some protagonists dancing ("The Squire of Gothos"), so essentially TOS told us that some "classic" forms of entertainment will still be cherished in the 23rd (and 24th Century).

Given the context of the new movies and since playing music or dancing don't exactly qualify as spectacle, I don't think we are going to see something like that in one of the upcoming movies.

Bob

OTOH, I don't recall one live musical interlude in Roddenberry's Star Trek: The Motion Picture, even though we did have an android woman.

OTOH, can I picture such a scene in Lost or Person of Interest (television shows)? ABSOLUTELY.