If it wasn't a prequel...

[Sharr Khan]

I do think that a movie which continues from the events in TNG, DS9 and Voyager with original actors would have a better chance to attract viewers than a TOS remake with new actors which the TOS fans will find it hard to relate to.

Paramount disagrees... since they're in the job of making movies I'll throw them a bone and assume they have a better notion of what will sell to the public. So far I've seen nothing that makes me think they were wrong with that notion.

The above, is so fan centered and at least on these boards in one form or another gets tossed out as an "original" idea about once ever month. It is just another form of "Go forward..." but in actual substance is really wanting more of the same that we've already gotten the last few years.

Take my educated guess for what its worth - THIS FILM will stand out and attract Joe schmo.

And in Paramount eyes there are simply Trek fans, not micro-categorized Trek fans. Besides there aren't enough of them alone to make producing a film worthwhile. A part me desperately wishes this film annoys the diehard "ToS Fans" well at the same time becoming a box office hit, it there were any justice in the universe it would.

Sharr

 

[Mrs Paris]

I doubt that the number of fans is getting smaller, have you ever been to a convention? There are thousands of people who go, especialy the Vegas convention, tens of thousands go to that every year. And it's not just older people, many people there are young people who have discovered Star Trek on their own and fell in love with it

 

[Sharr Khan]

I doubt that the number of fans is getting smaller, have you ever been to a convention? There are thousands of people who go, especialy the Vegas convention, tens of thousands go to that every year. And it's not just older people, many people there are young people who have discovered Star Trek on their own and fell in love with it

I have been to a convention but not in a long while, that is hardly a scientific sampling of viewers or movie goers - the steadily declining ratings of the shows themselves is proof there are fewer "fans" - that is if we take the meaning of the word in its most truest sense. Someone who regardless sticks to the show and is able to see past its flaws and just like it - Fans are by their very nature always in the minority. I would apply the same standard to any franchise or series: BSG, Firefly, Harry Potter, Star Wars, Trek, MASH, Cheers...

Sharr

 

[Lynx]

I think most fans would like a movie set after Nemesis with a few characters from the past shows. It makes more sense to go into the future where you don't have to worry about tripping over previously established facts than to go inot the past where you do have to worry about not contradicting things that have already been established.

and people say that the movie shouldn't be made for the "fanboys" well who else is going to see it? Star Trek will always be seen as "geeky" it will never be mainstream. Do you honestly think your average teenager (the target audience for a movie) is going to turn to his friends and say "hey guys lets go see that new Star Trek movie" no of course not. The "fanboys" are the ones who will see the movie in theaters more than once, who will buy all the merchanise, and the dvd and the special edition dvd, and buy all the collectibles and go to conventions and so on. It's the "fanboys" that have kept Star Trek alive for the past 40 years

Here I agree. In fact, one of the things which did turn away many Star Trek fans from "Enterprise" was the constant screwing up of established Star Trek history.

I think that they are on the wrong track in their strategy. They are trying to "play safe" by recycling Kirk, Spock and the other TOS favorites with new actors, not considering that many TOS fans cringe at the sight of new actors portraying their old favorites. And, as Mrs Paris pointed out in her post, the average teenager will not run to the nearest movie to see the new Trek film, it will be the "fanboys" who will go there first. In fact, the "fanboys" will be those who might save the project because they will watch it at least once because it's Star Trek. (They might bash it afterwards but they will at least watch it.)

Thats why I think that a movie with a mixed cast from TNG, DS9 and Voyager would have a better chance to attract viewers. Most of the fans of those shows would go to the movies to see their old favorites and since they would be portrayed by actors who, in the eyes of the fans, are those characters, such a movie would get a better receiving than a TOS movie with "wrong" actors who already are dismissed by many die-hard TOS fans.

 

[Mrs Paris]

I think most fans would like a movie set after Nemesis with a few characters from the past shows. It makes more sense to go into the future where you don't have to worry about tripping over previously established facts than to go inot the past where you do have to worry about not contradicting things that have already been established.

and people say that the movie shouldn't be made for the "fanboys" well who else is going to see it? Star Trek will always be seen as "geeky" it will never be mainstream. Do you honestly think your average teenager (the target audience for a movie) is going to turn to his friends and say "hey guys lets go see that new Star Trek movie" no of course not. The "fanboys" are the ones who will see the movie in theaters more than once, who will buy all the merchanise, and the dvd and the special edition dvd, and buy all the collectibles and go to conventions and so on. It's the "fanboys" that have kept Star Trek alive for the past 40 years

Here I agree. In fact, one of the things which did turn away many Star Trek fans from "Enterprise" was the constant screwing up of established Star Trek history.

I think that they are on the wrong track in their strategy. They are trying to "play safe" by recycling Kirk, Spock and the other TOS favorites with new actors, not considering that many TOS fans cringe at the sight of new actors portraying their old favorites. And, as Mrs Paris pointed out in her post, the average teenager will not run to the nearest movie to see the new Trek film, it will be the "fanboys" who will go there first. In fact, the "fanboys" will be those who might save the project because they will watch it at least once because it's Star Trek. (They might bash it afterwards but they will at least watch it.)

Thats why I think that a movie with a mixed cast from TNG, DS9 and Voyager would have a better chance to attract viewers. Most of the fans of those shows would go to the movies to see their old favorites and since they would be portrayed by actors who, in the eyes of the fans, are those characters, such a movie would get a better receiving than a TOS movie with "wrong" actors who already are dismissed by many die-hard TOS fans.

you agreed with me!!!!! Wow

 

[Tai]

I would have liked to see a show about the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 F,G, or H set post 2380. It would be a big action adventure story.

I would have budgeted it one of two ways:

$40 million and $8 million for marketing

Smaller battles, decent SFX, but complete sets and good renders for the ship so that if it becomes a hit, and makes a nice profit over its costs it could be used as the launching vehicle for a new series in 2010.

For example "Serenity" wasn't a commercial success, but it was a fine movie with great action and none of the production values were lacking. If it had a brand as recognized as Star Trek, it could have had the same or even bigger box office as Nemesis, which for its production costs would have been a nice success. I'd use it as a blue-print for the scale that a new post-Nemesis era Star Trek film should take.


$150 million and $25 million for marketing

A big special effects bonanza. Think Iron Man... have a bunch of A-listers play the cast ala Ocean's 11... turn it into a film that vies for the top 3 for the year's box office. Star Trek has the potential to do it if it's given the ultimate Star Wars, Pirates, Matrix treatment... this would risk the whole franchise. If it's a hit, it spawns 2 sequels and goes into the billions in world-wide revenue. If it's a loss, it kills the franchise.


I think the Abrams strategy and budget falls somewhere in the middle of these two. I hope genuinely that it's a quality film, and that it turns a profit, but I don't think it's going to be mind-blowing, like the Matrix was in 1999 or Lord of the Rings in 2001. I think it'll be a fun summer popcorn flick that'll be in the public consiousness for about 2-3 months and then be relevent only to Star Trek fans and boards... It'll kinda be a lot like Mission Impossible III minus the drama from Tom Cruise.

 

[JoeZhang]

pandering to fanboys is a dead-end that leads to every diminishing returns - the whole point of what they are trying to do is get people in who'd never go and watch a Star Trek movie.

Watching 60 year old men in their PJs is not going to do that.

 

[M'Sharak]

...

...

you agreed with me!!!!! Wow

A word to the wise: cool it, right now. No squabbles imported from other forums or from other boards, please.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

If it wasn't a prequel I wouldn't be a fraction as interested in it as I am now.

 

[number6]

It really needs to be a prequel. Simply plopping another ship and crew into the 25th century is a dead end. The TNG era has petered out and the window for doing anything with DS9 or VOY on the big screen has long gone. The best way to go is really what they're trying to do now. If you say Star Trek to the common Joe, the first thing that comes to mind is Kirk and Spock. The only way to reinvigorate the franchise is to reimagine it.

As far as what the fans really want...ask 50 fans the same question and you'll get 50 different answers. The general movie going public couldn't give a rip about the kind of minutae Trek fans will argue about, and thank God this film isn't pandering to that.

I think it's unrealistic for hardcore fandom to be able to armchair quaterback what the producers should and shouldn't do and expect to be taken seriously in any way shape, or form.
A lot of Star Wars fans hate the prequels with a passion, yet all three of those films made a shitton of money. Someone obviously went to see it. Spiderman III is pretty hated by the Spiderman fans, and yet the film made a shitton of money. Clearly people went to see that film too. To think that the general public aren't going to flock to a big budget Star Trek film is ludicrous. Paramount is spending more money on this film than any other Trek film. They may not understand Star Trek the way we do, but they're in the business to make a shitton of money. They certainly wouldn't be spending the kind of cake they're spending if they weren't expecting the film to do well, especially after the failure of Nemesis. There will likely be a big publicity push and there is already quite a bit of hype building already and that will only increase next year.

Paramount is looking for a new audience for Star Trek. The old audience has dwindled to a handful of bitter implacable fanboys. This is the way they're going. See the film or don't see it, but rest assured, the days of trying to please the fanbase are long over. Paramount couldn't care less about you and they don't need your approval, and I think the film will be good regardless because the people making it are interested in making a good film.

 

[Lynx]

you agreed with me!!!!! Wow

Why not? Lots of good comments in that post!

 

[Lynx]

pandering to fanboys is a dead-end that leads to every diminishing returns - the whole point of what they are trying to do is get people in who'd never go and watch a Star Trek movie.

Watching 60 year old men in their PJs is not going to do that.

The sad thing is that they have tried to attract viewers who normally don't watch Star Trek before-with disastrous results.

As soon as someone, it might be a movie company or a rock band, starts to "sell out" in some futile attempt to attract "the in-crowd", "trendy teenagers" or "people who normally don't watch Star Trek" and forget about their old fans, they are doomed. The "trendy people" or whatsoever will see it as a commodity and then move on to other things while the true fans will turn their backs to the sell-outs.

What they should try to do is to keep the old fans while trying to get new fans. That's exactly what TNG was about when it started. It was the Star Trek concept of good, thoughtful stories and good characters combined with new characters, a new ship and new scenarios which still had as much of the old Star Trek in it to be liked and appreciated by most TOS fans as well.

I've never been fond of the prequel ideas. I can't understand why they abandoned the wonderful, interesting universe they had in TNG, DS9 and Voyager only to go back to some pre-TOS era as they did in "Enterprise" and I don't understand why they have to "recycle" TOS in some cut-prize version either. That would be the same as if a record company abandoned modern technology and went back to mono recordings on 78 rpm records.

 

[Mrs Paris]

...

you agreed with me!!!!! Wow

A word to the wise: cool it, right now. No squabbles imported from other forums or from other boards, please.

cool what?

 

[number6]

you agreed with me!!!!! Wow

A word to the wise: cool it, right now. No squabbles imported from other forums or from other boards, please.

cool what?

It.


Whatever "it" hapens to be. Apparently "it" needs some cooling.

 

[Mrs Paris]

but what is it? nothing was said, nothing was done, there was no hostility on anyone's part nothing was mean....so what needs to be cooled?

 

[Tralah]

I've never been fond of the prequel ideas. I can't understand why they abandoned the wonderful, interesting universe they had in TNG, DS9 and Voyager only to go back to some pre-TOS era as they did in "Enterprise"

Because it wasn't profitable for them to make adventures in TNG, DS9, and Voyager universe as much as I love the 24th Century, and am sad to admit it, there's no denying this fact. As you point out they they attempted to reinvigorate the franchise with Enterprise, but made the mistake of keeping the same tired people in charge who were stuck in a rut and just going through the motions. So now they're trying it again with TOS characters and a new creative team. They may fail or they may succeed, but I certainly can understand WHY they're doing it this way. Since Star Trek needs a hit, I'm hoping for the best.

 

[Mrs Paris]

I think the producers are using Nemesis reactions to say that the fanbase is not interested in Star Trek anymore. But that's not fair. If you write a script that isn't that great, and hire a director who knows nothing about Star Trek, then kill off a BIG MAIN character......and then blame the fans for not liking it.

we're not losing interest, we just won't flock to see a movie ONLY because it has the words Star Trek in the title. Not everything can be a smash hit, but when it's not a fantastic movie to blame it on the fans is downright insulting

 

[number6]

I think the producers are using Nemesis reactions to say that the fanbase is not interested in Star Trek anymore. But that's not fair. If you write a script that isn't that great, and hire a director who knows nothing about Star Trek, then kill off a BIG MAIN character......and then blame the fans for not liking it.

we're not losing interest, we just won't flock to see a movie ONLY because it has the words Star Trek in the title. Not everything can be a smash hit, but when it's not a fantastic movie to blame it on the fans is downright insulting

They are right to use Nemesis as a model. In Hollywood, you're only as good as your last film. Period. If that reasoning isn't good enough, look at the diminishing returns on INS. Then look at the falling ratings of every Trek since TNG.

I personally don't think we need another TNG era movie because we essentially got 20 years of it already with three series and four movies.
There really isn't any reason to bring TNG back. However, Kirk and Spock are pop icons. Doing a Trek film with Kirk and Spock is a guaranteed slam dunk for the studio. A good Star Trek film is a bonus, for them and for us.

Hollywood is doing remakes. At least there is some genuine talent in this one, and a concern for doing it well.

 

[JoeZhang]

pandering to fanboys is a dead-end that leads to every diminishing returns - the whole point of what they are trying to do is get people in who'd never go and watch a Star Trek movie.

Watching 60 year old men in their PJs is not going to do that.

The sad thing is that they have tried to attract viewers who normally don't watch Star Trek before-with disastrous results.

When????????????

 

[number6]

pandering to fanboys is a dead-end that leads to every diminishing returns - the whole point of what they are trying to do is get people in who'd never go and watch a Star Trek movie.

Watching 60 year old men in their PJs is not going to do that.

The sad thing is that they have tried to attract viewers who normally don't watch Star Trek before-with disastrous results.

When????????????

The Voyage Home and First Contact were enormous failures.. Didn't you get the memo?