How would we be reacting if this movie flopped?

[Peter the Younger]

Ignoring the pre-digested vitriol, which you appear to have been chewing since well before May 8th: if it had flopped, I would have scratched my head for a while, and then concluded that society had moved on, and Star Trek was essentially dead.

As to your opinions of the film, your disgust is noted.

 

[MPH]

Trek was dead before this film and they had to move with the times if thats more action and plot holes then so be it.
I for one think its the best Trek film since TUC and up there with TWOK. The TNG films never seemed like films to me just extended epiosdes and not very good ones at that.

 

[Trilliam]

Ignoring the pre-digested vitriol, which you appear to have been chewing since well before May 8th: if it had flopped, I would have scratched my head for a while, and then concluded that society had moved on, and Star Trek was essentially dead.

As to your opinions of the film, your disgust is noted.

I would have blamed the MTV generation and their goldfish-like attention spans

 

[miraclefan]

I would have blamed the MTV generation and their goldfish-like attention spans

I'm sorry to say I've met some of them ''goldfish'' your talking about! But I would have blamed the HIP-HOP!

 

[Trilliam]

I would have blamed the MTV generation and their goldfish-like attention spans

I'm sorry to say I've met some of them ''goldfish'' your talking about! But I would have blamed the HIP-HOP!

 

[erebus]

I'm not sure, but i think i've just been patronised.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

This being said, after viewing the movie last night I left the theatre absolutely disgusted. To me, it isn't just the worst of the 11 Star Trek films, it is a terrible terrible movie. Star Trek has been many things over the past 40+ years, but one thing it very very rarely has been is stupid. This movie is dumbed down for the masses beyond belief.

I've never considered Trek intellectual. I've often found it dumbchillingly stupid (Encounter at Farpoint springs to mind, and that's not even delving into the eps universally considered stupid). The ethical dilemmas in Trek are often simplistic and when the choices made are morally ambiguous (some DS9 eps) fans tend to get offended because they want a clear moral code promoted, not a potentially intellectual and ethical challenge. I really think the idea that Trek is somehow "smart" is rather laughable. It's all about the characters and the exploration and the world it creates and it does all that very very well.

So, I don't considered it dumbed down from the series at all. It was excellent in character development and it's very exciting to me to see a movie with lots of blowing-uppy scenes to actually be about character development and not the explosions. The nuSpock storyline, how it tied in with TOS in many wonderful hommagy ways, how you could clearly see how the alternate timeline could veer our Spock into different directions.. well it may not be intellectual but it has given more to think about as far as Trek goes that I've had in years.

This movie made Starship Troopers seem like a timeless classic.

As has been said, Starship Troopers IS a timeless classic. It's a parody though some seem to want to view it otherwise.

So yes, we have a big box office hit, and that's great. The thing is JJ, you didn't have to write a movie catering to testostorone filled adolescents. Star Trek 1-4 and 7-8 were movies that made a lot of money, and they were still Star Trek films.

See here's where your bias is coming through. Clearly many folks who are not testosterone filled adolescents loved this movie. I am 46, female, and action film avoidant. One of my biggest fears about this movie was that it would end up a contentless action film like so many seem to be these days. I was thrilled to watch a movie so full of plot where the action sequences, as well as being full of emotional impact, were supporting scenes to the plot and not the other way around.

My question is this, have we been so used to Star Trek being a commercial failure (Voyager, Enterprise, Insurrection, Nemesis) that we are unconsiously neglecting to question the actual quality of this film as a Star Trek episode because "Star Trek" is considered so very popular right now by the masses? If you look at the past, it seems that some of the many (perhaps insecure) Star Trek fans DETEST what fails/makes less money but are ready to jump on the bandwagon when Star Trek makes money. For example, as much as most of you claim to detest Star Trek Nemesis, I am willing to BET that you all wouldn't despise it so much if it made 100 million dollars.

As to Nemesis I considered it a decent double episode of TNG, same as INS. Neither of them really took the leap into movie land for me, but I do rewatch them on dvd now and then. If it had made 100 million my opinion would be the same, please don't say my opinion is driven by how much a film makes. I formed my opinion on STXI and NEM on the first day it opened prior to any box office reports and prior to reading this BBS's responses.

 

[M'Sharak]

How would we be reacting if this movie flopped?

It probably wouldn't be nearly as busy around here, for one thing, but it's not like plenty of us don't remember Trek tanking in the theaters before. This is much more fun than that was.

<snip>

For years I watched so many of you dispute minute issues regarding canon and continuty, yet no one is picking this movie apart?!?

<snip>

I really think you ought to take a little time to look around here.

Read the pinned Grading & Discussion thread. Read the threads JustKate has linked. Do forum searches for words like "hate" and "appalled" and "abomination" -- you'll find plenty who disliked it or found it disappointing in one way or another. There has been no lack of people being critical of the movie, some of them far more angry and going on at far greater length than yourself and some of them discussing it much more calmly, systematically and analytically.

Just take a look around.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I would just like to point out that it is STILL possible this film will fail financially. It's at what, $240 million? It needs $300 at a minimum to break even, according to the standard rule, based on budget.

Terminator:Salvation and Night at the Museum II are about to knock it down AT LEAST to #3 at the box.

 

[Tentacle]

there are alot of people that hate this movie just like you. but their voices are drowned out by the cheerleaders, or the thread will degenerate into a giant geek off with cannons.

But if you are trying to point out the seer dumbness of the movie. You are better served by drinking hemlock as plato did.

Into the allegory of the cave with you.

 

[Overgeeked]

But Starship Troopers, IS a timeless CLASSIC!

+1

 

[Danoz]

Look, people, to each his own. I have a buddy I've been watching Star Trek with for years now and he was disappointed by the movie. I personally went into the movie the way I would prepare for a piece of candy over say, a glass of red wine. If you go into "Star Trek" preparing your pallet for something sweet, delicious, and without substance, you'll enjoy it (and don't tell me Star Trek as a franchise in general is above this kind of story, because you're full of it). Whereas, I'm rewatching DS9-- and I prepare for the series expecting a deep and meaningful story of complex interrelationships dealing in politics, religion and ethics (aka. the glass of wine).

Give our new grape juice movie some time... it needs to find itself. For now, I'm happy to be along for the ride and I have faith in Abrams and Company to deliver.

 

[Overgeeked]

For me I'd feel the same. Exactly the same if it flopped, only I'd feel justice was done.

This movie deserved to flop. It was horribly written (plot wise). And all the best bits were cribbed from the Ghost of Treks Past.

 

[Tentacle]

Look, people, to each his own. I have a buddy I've been watching Star Trek with for years now and he was disappointed by the movie. I personally went into the movie the way I would prepare for a piece of candy over say, a glass of red wine. If you go into "Star Trek" preparing your pallet for something sweet, delicious, and without substance, you'll enjoy it (and don't tell me Star Trek as a franchise in general is above this kind of story, because you're full of it). Whereas, I'm rewatching DS9-- and I prepare for the series expecting a deep and meaningful story of complex interrelationships dealing in politics, religion and ethics (aka. the glass of wine).

Give our new grape juice movie some time... it needs to find itself. For now, I'm happy to be along for the ride and I have faith in Abrams and Company to deliver.

I would agree with you on that, if i prepared myself for the dumbness i probably would of enjoy it.

What annoys me is that when you try to point out the dumbest, you are ridiculed.
What baffles the mind is the dumbness seem to be ignored by most people. And some even try to defend it as being a smart and well acted movie.
All it comes down to is, most have a guttural feeling of love towards this movie, and can not bothered to find the time to dissect it and analysis it.
I have a suspicion that most realizes the fact that if you try to dissect this feeling, you would find it quite shallow, thus it is to be avoided at all cost.

 

[Danoz]

For me I'd feel the same. Exactly the same if it flopped, only I'd feel justice was done.

This movie deserved to flop. It was horribly written (plot wise). And all the best bits were cribbed from the Ghost of Treks Past.

I'm actually surprised it didn't flop, but pleasantly happy with the unexpected result. Had I seen this movie before its release I would have never guessed it would have a 95% on RottenTomatoes and that my colleagues would be a discussing Star Trek at the water cooler; goes to show with how out of touch I am!

Though, again, despite its flaws-- it was still trek for me, and I enjoyed it. Unlike others I didn't disown Voyager and Enterprise, either .

 

[PKTrekGirl]

Well, I disagree with your premise, so it's difficult for me to respond.

First of all, IMO, it is either the best or at worse, the second best (perhaps behind TWOK) of all the Star Trek moves. And frankly, I really struggle with the idea that anyone could think it worse than Nemesis, even if they didn't like this movie.

Nemesis was not only the worst Trek film I've ever seen, it might well be the worst film I've ever seen PERIOD. The cast was tired and old and boring and uninspiring and no longer fitting to the characters, and the plot had several gaping plot holes you could drive a starship through. The film just didn't even make sense, on a very basic level.

And like this movie or not...at least the plot makes sense and is a cohesive story.

If this movie, as is, had bombed, I would have been disappointed. But it wouldn't have changed my opinion of the movie in the slightest...mostly because I do not base my opinion of anything on the opinions of others. I think for myself.

As for no one picking it apart around here. Well, all I can say to that is that if you believe that, than you haven't read this forum. Plenty of people dislike the film around here.

But if you were hoping for one big giant bitch-fest about absurdly minuscule points of canon, with everyone in lock-step agreement with you that this film sucked because the transporter beam didn't look like the one in the last TOS film...then sorry...you are not gonna find that here either.

There are some folks who loved it...and some folks who didn't. And all are entitled to their opinions.

 

[Dale]

How would I have been reacting if the film had flopped?

If the film had sucked, which it most decidedly did not, I'd've reacted with disappointment, sadness and doomsaying about Trek's future viability, and with anger at JJ for failing to win his gamble to revitalize the franchise.

Had it been the movie I've now seen four times and it flopped at the box office, I'd still be excited and thrilled... and I'd be shilling for the movie as hard as I could, getting as many people as I could manage to give it a look.

As it is, I don't have that problem. The movie freakin' rocked, and it's a big damn hit! Bring on the sequels!

 

[PKTrekGirl]

^ My feelings exactly.

 

[Overgeeked]

How would I have been reacting if the film had flopped?

If the film had sucked, which it most decidedly did not, I'd've reacted with disappointment, sadness and doomsaying about Trek's future viability, and with anger at JJ for failing to win his gamble to revitalize the franchise.

Had it been the movie I've now seen four times and it flopped at the box office, I'd still be excited and thrilled... and I'd be shilling for the movie as hard as I could, getting as many people as I could manage to give it a look.

As it is, I don't have that problem. The movie freakin' rocked, and it's a big damn hit! Bring on the sequels!

Trouble is, aesthetic arguments are subjective by nature, rather than objective. Whether the film sucked or it decidedly did not is a matter of subjective opinion, not objective fact. Repeating your subjective opinion as objective fact until the stars fall from the sky will not magically turn your opinion into the reality of the world around you.

I happen to disagree with your subjective opinion with a subjective opinion of my own, but at least I'm stating why I don't like it rather than simply that I don't like it.

That the best parts of this film are taken (whole cloth) from over 40+ years of prior Trek series / episodes / movies is plain to see. That there are huge plot holes in the film is plain to see. Why are people so willing to ignore them? Did the kewl 'splosions distract the audience that much?

I'm not saying it's the worst movie ever. It's not. And it's not even the worst Trek movie ever. But it's still not that good of a SF movie, or a Trek flick either. It's a great action-thrill ride with the typical lack of plot. Times (and tastes) change I guess.

 

[MeanJoePhaser]

I just assumed the film's success is part of JJ's long-term contract with Satan.