Did the PT delay epic post-Undiscovered Country Star Treks?

[sonak]

well, as another poster mentioned, the first two TNG movies were successful, FC especially so. If the characters were truly not "compelling," you'd think the TNG movie franchise would've been a failure from the start. I think it's just linked to quality and oversaturation.


Again, the Classic movies mostly got the benefit of not competing against new Trek on TV.(And when they did, as in V and VI, the box office performance showed it)

TNG NEVER got that opportunity.

 

[MANT!]

sonak...

Beg to differ with your assessment of the performance of TUC..it was a solid box office performer in 1991... with earnings of $96,888,996 worldwide... from a total budget of $27,000,000...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102975/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_VI:_The_Undiscovered_Country

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek6.htm

it was the 4th top grossing PG rated film that year..hardly a bad box office performance...

The film did well because it was a decent film, not suck-ass like TFF...And "competing with TNG" didn't seem to hurt TUC...

Star Trek's "downfall" never was a case of too many trips to the well for the fans..but too many rehashed stories from the producers and their writing staff...

IMHO, they simply got lazy... and the franchise paid the price...

 

[sonak]

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

these are domestic box office grosses.
this chart has STVI fourth from last, below Star Trek I-IV, all of which came out before new Trek on TV and are among the highest, justifying my point exactly.


In fact, this chart shows that five of the top six grossers came out with no new Trek on TV.



I love this chart, it pretty much shows that oversaturation was the problem, and proves it through box office data.(except FC, which was a great movie and had the Borg)

 

[btflash]

This is a theory/wild fan-speculation I first made on the SF/F board, buried in a larger/more general PT thread; now that I've polished it up for my brand-new Star Wars Prequel Rejection Society blog, I thought I'd share it here as well.


Did the PT delay epic post-Undiscovered Country Star Treks?

There’s a pretty broad (and, in my opinion, entirely accurate) consensus that Star Trek XI is a better movie than any of the Star Wars prequels. Sure, XI sexed and revved up its franchise to the point where many old stalwarts (myself included) got mildly to severely disoriented, but for all its canonical and tonal faults and/or departures, it at least was a fun and satisfying adventure. And heck, given its not-so-subtle lifts from the Lucasfilm series (the new warp, ship-phaser and other effects, as well as the overall tone and pace), I consider XI the best Star Wars movie since Jedi.

Here’s a question, though: did the PT not only drag Wars into the gutter, but put a crimp in Trek‘s style, too? I suspect that, without the prequels, we just might have had bigger and better TNG movies. To wit: the PT was announced in ’94, so from then until 2005, the Paramount bosses knew that there’d be three movies released over a six-year period that, due to SW‘s huge popularity, Lucas’ budget and the story’s inevitable scope, would dwarf any TNGs in terms of action, production design and all-around epic-ness. Why bother compete if you can’t win? So, the suits instead insisted upon cheaper, more character-based Trek outings… but over the course of a seven-year TV run, TNG had pretty well used up its cast’s potential character stories already, so their movies weren’t too good, either awkwardly incorporating TOS (Generations), rehashing TNG‘s glory days (First Contact), recycling TNG‘s merely average days (Insurrection), and just plain ripping off TWOK (Nemesis).* We never saw any Dominion War movies, for instance, in spite of its natural cinematic potential… could the PT have been part of the reason why?

And is it, in short, any coincidence that the first post-Undiscovered Country/PT announcement Trek movie released after ROTS was the first to pack Wars-like scope, thrills and action?

Did GL’s film fiascoes kneecap a whole generation of films in both franchises?

*Which isn’t to say that the TNG movies were worse than the prequels, because they totally weren’t.




Your thoughts?

when this movie came out my first post was that it was the best star wars movie in a long time.

 

[btflash]

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

these are domestic box office grosses.
this chart has STVI fourth from last, below Star Trek I-IV, all of which came out before new Trek on TV and are among the highest, justifying my point exactly.


In fact, this chart shows that five of the top six grossers came out with no new Trek on TV.



I love this chart, it pretty much shows that oversaturation was the problem, and proves it through box office data.(except FC, which was a great movie and had the Borg)

what are those totals when adjusted for inflation , though?