Has irreparable damage been done to Star Trek's brand?

[Norrin Radd]

A summer blockbuster gets almost universal positive reviews. It has a well known brand name. It has a big budget. It's doing okay at the box office, but not that great.

Who is at fault? What has occurred over the past decade(s) to devalue the Star Trek image?

 

[Sagart]

I don't follow. How has it been devalued? Trek was never huge at the box office but it has re-emerged in the public consciousness in a way it hasn't been since...well, maybe even the premiere of TNG.

Trek is being talked about in a way it hasn't been before. People who never 'got it' are going back to the originals. It's getting noticed by mainstream critics and hailed as fresh and exciting. When did we last hear that about Trek? As far as I'm concerned Trek as a brand is stronger than ever at the moment. This movie will be, IMO, a big DVD and Blu-Ray hit and the sequel should be to this one what TDK was to Batman Begins (not Box Office wise but in terms of anticipation).

Trek is living and prospering and I think it's great.

 

[SFRabid]

Number one movie AND good reviews. When is the last time this happened?

 

[Zulu Romeo]

A summer blockbuster gets almost universal positive reviews. It has a well known brand name. It has a big budget. It's doing okay at the box office, but not that great.

Who is at fault? What has occurred over the past decade(s) to devalue the Star Trek image?

So Star Trek is well regarded, well reviewed, enjoyable and popular, and you say this is a bad thing for the franchise?

If anything, the film has revitalised the Star Trek image that had been devalued by its own juggernaut due to years of stagnation in the face of quality televisual and theatrical genre rivals.

I say kick back and bask in the sunshine.

 

[WeAreTheBorg]

I wouldn't define it as "doing okay". For a film still fit for a niche audience despite it successfully broadening its appeal, 150 million in the first week is stellar

 

[Dream]

Voyager and Enterprise were the ones that did lots of damage to the Trek brand. The new Star Trek movie brought the franchise back to life.

 

[James Bond]

A summer blockbuster gets almost universal positive reviews. It has a well known brand name. It has a big budget. It's doing okay at the box office, but not that great.

Who is at fault? What has occurred over the past decade(s) to devalue the Star Trek image?

How is it doing just "okay?"

 

[Haggis and tatties]

A summer blockbuster gets almost universal positive reviews. It has a well known brand name. It has a big budget. It's doing okay at the box office, but not that great.

Who is at fault? What has occurred over the past decade(s) to devalue the Star Trek image?

Star trek prior to this movie was dead and buried, the movie, TV and game franchises were all in the bin.

This movie has helped relaunched the Franchise in a big way, and with a double assault on BR media with TOS season 1 and the first 6 movies, i think we will see a vast improvement in Star Trek merchandise sales from this point.

Although i think you better check out the box office threads, you will find its doing considerably better than "Not to great"...

Why is Trek back, Kirk put it perfectly......."You minds fresh idea's...be tolerant"

 

[Lynn Minmay]

Voyager and Enterprise were the ones that did lots of damage to the Trek brand. The new Star Trek movie brought the franchise back to life.

THIS.

...and this movie is doing better than okay.

 

[Mr. B]

I know I'm likely alone in this view, but in spite of Trek's (previously) languishing state, I always considered it above the fray in many respects. It had a certain integrity because it had not surrendered itself to the lowest common denominator. Of course, it has now done so unconditionally with this new film. Storytelling is out and attention span driven action sequences are in.

I think the brand has been severely damaged, but at least it's profitable... and what else really matters?

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

The brand starting damaging itself after TNG. DS9 may be universally loved by a lot of fans here at the BBS, but a majority of viewers just didn't get it. You needed some prior knowledge of Trek to watch DS9... at least, that's how the majority felt about it. Same deal with Voyager and Enterprise. I'm of the opinion that overexposure led in part to the damaging of Star Trek.

That and the fact that Voyager took bland characterization and technobabble to a whole new level, making it a salvagable show only through the snarky holodoc.

Enterprise was an attempt at damage control, but it was like sticking a piece of gum in a leaky dam... made of gum.

 

[new_mercury]

people who have never gone near star trek have gone to the film enjoyed it and are now asking me about it as they never have before. they knew i was a star trek fan but never mentioned it. the image is improving I think. as someone who was bullied as a kid for being a "trekkie geek loser" I don't mind one bit.

 

[barnaclelapse]

I think it's held up quite well. The franchise got a little stagnant over the last few years, but it was still holding up remarkably well for a forty-plus-year-old creative entity. I don't know how many more years that would have hung on without this film, but prior to its release, I do think it was still in pretty decent shape, all things considered.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The brand has been revitalized as something respectable, that can get on the covers of magazines and make serious $$$, rather than a sideline thing that is old/hokey/a joke.

The plan is pretty much unfolding on schedule, I'd say.

I know I'm likely alone in this view, but in spite of Trek's (previously) languishing state, I always considered it above the fray in many respects.

Nothing is "above the fray." Even seemingly unassailable premium brands - say, Tiffany's - are actively managed in order to keep them appearing to be "above the fray." The lack of effort is an intentional impression - there's plenty of effort, believe me, but at a certain level of classiness, it's counterproductive to let us see it. Brands don't keep themselves afloat without anyone's effort.

Anyway, Star Trek isn't really analogous to Tiffanys. I'd say it's more like DeBeers - a big-ass brand that tries to convey a kind of inclusive but classy image that promises quality but doesn't scare customers off by being too far above them.

 

[Mysterion]

No.

If anything, this new movie has stripped off a lot of the un-necessary bagge that has been dragging Trek down for the last decade or more.

Re-setting Trek back to the state that made TOS a popular sho win the first place is a good thing. They've re-opened the Trek universe so any future projects can go a number of interesting directions.

 

[chardman]

It had a certain integrity because it had not surrendered itself to the lowest common denominator. Of course, it has now done so unconditionally with this new film.

Bullshit. Your opinion sucks and has no basis in reality.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Ah, be civil, please

 

[Mr. B]

Bullshit. Your opinion sucks and has no basis in reality.

Great post, that. Where would be we without your insightful contributions?

 

[chardman]

Ah, be civil, please

That was civil. I didn't attack him, but his position. Which is precisely how the board rules mandates in situations where opinions conflict. In that regard, my post was practically a textbook example of civility, at least insofar as it is defined in the Board rules.

 

[chardman]

Bullshit. Your opinion sucks and has no basis in reality.

Great post, that. Where would be we without your insightful contributions?

Thank you very much. They are insightful, aren't they?