If it wasn't a prequel...

[Lynx]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series. It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

The presence of some of the actors from those series will make it real in a way because for most of the fans, actors like Stewart, Mulgrew, Brooks and the others are those characters.

I'm not so sure that a recycled TOS will have the same potential to attract that many fans or newcomers. Many TOS fans will dislike it because Shatner, Nimoy and the other original actors aren't involved and I'm not so sure that the names Kirk and Spock will attract new fans either. Those "newbies" who like TOS may say that "oh, the original was much better" while people outside the Star trek domain will regard it as "ah, that old sixties thing".

The movie must have a tremendous story and be really well-done to succeed.

OK, recycling is common in Hollywood but how many recycled movies or storylines are actually as good as or better than the original. Not many.

And Star Trek fans are not exactly like those average people who go to the movies for some action. Star Trek fans are critical. They will nitpick the storyline, search for contradictions to established Trek history and they will watch the new actors very critically. If anyone of those actors fail to live up to the image of the character the fans might have, then you will see the result on every message board.

"Insurrection" and "Nemesis" failed because of lame stories, bad producing plus the killing off of a beloved character. It may also have suffered from the overkill of Star Trek that we had in those years. We had three excellent series going almost at the same time for years plus two rather good movies. "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" were simply not up to the standard of the best or good episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager.

 

[JoeZhang]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series.

Who are pretty much all the same people - what have you got for people not into 60 years olds in PJs ?

 

[Lynx]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series.

Who are pretty much all the same people - what have you got for people not into 60 years olds in PJs ?

Most of the TNG, DS9 and Voyager fans are between 15 and 40.

 

[JoeZhang]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series.

Who are pretty much all the same people - what have you got for people not into 60 years olds in PJs ?

Most of the TNG, DS9 and Voyager fans are between 15 and 40.

I just don't believe that and I'll ask you to supply some evidence that is true. I'm guessing that's it's actually 30 and upwards - ageing and dying off.

 

[Mrs Paris]

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????????????

it was a little thing called Enterprise

 

[number6]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

You are in the minority.
Who is saying that this is a "recycled TOS"(other than you-of course)
From what I've heard so far, this certainly isn't the case.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series.

The problem is that a film franchise cannot sustain itself by limiting itself to those 3-4 million remaining fans. The approach of the film franchise since TMP has always been to pull in new fans.

It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

Doubtful. The spinoff series don't have anywhere near the viewership that TOS reruns do. TOS is in the cultural lexicon. TNG et al are not.

The presence of some of the actors from those series will make it real in a way because for most of the fans, actors like Stewart, Mulgrew, Brooks and the others are those characters.

And they have hung up their space suits and moved onto other things.
I seriously doubt we'll see Brooks reprising his role in this lifetime.

I'm not so sure that a recycled TOS will have the same potential to attract that many fans or newcomers.

First of all, it's not "Recycled TOS." It just isn't. There is nothing to imply that it is. If you ask the average Joe about Star Trek, they know Kirk and Spock. Doing a film with Kirk and Spock will attrack new fans. It almost doesn't matter who's playing them.

Many TOS fans will dislike it because Shatner, Nimoy and the other original actors aren't involved and I'm not so sure that the names Kirk and Spock will attract new fans either.

Many TOS fans have already made up their minds regardless. I'm a TOS fan from the early 70s and I can't wait to see this film.
A couple of the other original actors are dead. The only way to tell a TOS story is to recast. This day was a long time coming and is now here.

Those "newbies" who like TOS may say that "oh, the original was much better" while people outside the Star trek domain will regard it as "ah, that old sixties thing".

Based on what? Have you already seen this film?

The movie must have a tremendous story and be really well-done to succeed.

In the end, that's really the only thing that matters.

OK, recycling is common in Hollywood but how many recycled movies or storylines are actually as good as or better than the original. Not many.

Not many, but some good ones include Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Cloverfield, A Kiss Before Dying, Star Wars III, Lord of the Rings, Ironman, Spiderman, Mission Impossible III, Oceans 1.

And Star Trek fans are not exactly like those average people who go to the movies for some action. Star Trek fans are critical. They will nitpick the storyline, search for contradictions to established Trek history and they will watch the new actors very critically. If anyone of those actors fail to live up to the image of the character the fans might have, then you will see the result on every message board.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, this movie isn't aimed right at them.

"Insurrection" and "Nemesis" failed because of lame stories, bad producing plus the killing off of a beloved character. It may also have suffered from the overkill of Star Trek that we had in those years. We had three excellent series going almost at the same time for years plus two rather good movies. "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" were simply not up to the standard of the best or good episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager.

It doesn't matter why they failed. They failed. Actually, INS didn't fail. It made money, but not as much as FC, which is the ONLY guage that Hollywood cares about. Nemesis, whether you liked it or not, was certainly not poorly produced. It was written and directed by someone with no real clue about the characters, but it was well produced.
It lost money. It was the only Trek film to do that. That is why another TNG film won't be made any time soon and rightly so.

 

[Mrs Paris]

Who are pretty much all the same people - what have you got for people not into 60 years olds in PJs ?

Most of the TNG, DS9 and Voyager fans are between 15 and 40.

I just don't believe that and I'll ask you to supply some evidence that is true. I'm guessing that's it's actually 30 and upwards - ageing and dying off.

nope sorry. I'm 25 and i've been a fan of the show since 1996. I go to conventions where I see thousands of fans, many of them are in their 20's or much younger, I'm not talking about kids who were dragged there with their parents, I'm talking teenagers who have a legitimate interest in Trek

 

[Mrs Paris]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

You are in the minority.
Who is saying that this is a "recycled TOS"(other than you-of course)
From what I've heard so far, this certainly isn't the case.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series.

The problem is that a film franchise cannot sustain itself by limiting itself to those 3-4 million remaining fans. The approach of the film franchise since TMP has always been to pull in new fans.


Doubtful. The spinoff series don't have anywhere near the viewership that TOS reruns do. TOS is in the cultural lexicon. TNG et al are not.


And they have hung up their space suits and moved onto other things.
I seriously doubt we'll see Brooks reprising his role in this lifetime.

First of all, it's not "Recycled TOS." It just isn't. There is nothing to imply that it is. If you ask the average Joe about Star Trek, they know Kirk and Spock. Doing a film with Kirk and Spock will attrack new fans. It almost doesn't matter who's playing them.


Many TOS fans have already made up their minds regardless. I'm a TOS fan from the early 70s and I can't wait to see this film.
A couple of the other original actors are dead. The only way to tell a TOS story is to recast. This day was a long time coming and is now here.

Based on what? Have you already seen this film?


In the end, that's really the only thing that matters.


Not many, but some good ones include Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Cloverfield, A Kiss Before Dying, Star Wars III, Lord of the Rings, Ironman, Spiderman, Mission Impossible III, Oceans 1.

And Star Trek fans are not exactly like those average people who go to the movies for some action. Star Trek fans are critical. They will nitpick the storyline, search for contradictions to established Trek history and they will watch the new actors very critically. If anyone of those actors fail to live up to the image of the character the fans might have, then you will see the result on every message board.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, this movie isn't aimed right at them.

"Insurrection" and "Nemesis" failed because of lame stories, bad producing plus the killing off of a beloved character. It may also have suffered from the overkill of Star Trek that we had in those years. We had three excellent series going almost at the same time for years plus two rather good movies. "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" were simply not up to the standard of the best or good episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager.

It doesn't matter why they failed. They failed. Actually, INS didn't fail. It made money, but not as much as FC, which is the ONLY guage that Hollywood cares about. Nemesis, whether you liked it or not, was certainly not poorly produced. It was written and directed by someone with no real clue about the characters, but it was well produced.
It lost money. It was the only Trek film to do that. That is why another TNG film won't be made any time soon and rightly so.

yes I agree that new fans are needed, but attracting those new fans should not come at the expense of losing the old fans

 

[JoeZhang]

Most of the TNG, DS9 and Voyager fans are between 15 and 40.

I just don't believe that and I'll ask you to supply some evidence that is true. I'm guessing that's it's actually 30 and upwards - ageing and dying off.

nope sorry. I'm 25 and i've been a fan of the show since 1996. I go to conventions where I see thousands of fans, many of them are in their 20's or much younger, I'm not talking about kids who were dragged there with their parents, I'm talking teenagers who have a legitimate interest in Trek

Your anecdotal evidence says more than real figures ever could

 

[Mrs Paris]

I see no "real figures" to back up your claim that all trek fans are "old"

 

[number6]

yes I agree that new fans are needed, but attracting those new fans should not come at the expense of losing the old fans

If the film is good and loads of people see it and enjoy it, that statement is merely academic.

Spiderman III made a shitton of money, but hardcore fans hated it. That shows that hardcore fans will still see it and complain, but it was the movie going general public that made it a hit.

 

[JoeZhang]

I see no "real figures" to back up your claim that all trek fans are "old"

Notice the bit where I saying I'm guessing, notice how it's in response to a very specific claim.

 

[Baldus885]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series. It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

Hopefully new fans? Do you think Abrams went to Paramount and said "I'm going to do a movie that a few existing fans will really love and hopefully will attract some new fans?"

I can't think of anything worse than wheeling out a bunch of overweight TNG, DS9 and Voyager actors for a movie designed to revamp the franchise. It would need a plot drenched in implausible fanwankery to get them together in one story, and it would cater to about 17 people (and don't start using TBBS posters as indicative of what the audience wants to see).

As someone said above, I'm only interested in this movie because it's a prequel. If they churned out Star Trek:Implausible, where Picard and B9 happen to meet Lt Paris, Neelix, Worf and Chief O'Brien just in time to save the universe from Porthos' clone, I wouldn't even pirate it, let alone go and see it, and I suspect a large number of other people would feel the same. We want something fresh and new, not a recycled contrivance from Trek's failed era.

 

[Mrs Paris]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series. It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

Hopefully new fans? Do you think Abrams went to Paramount and said "I'm going to do a movie that a few existing fans will really love and hopefully will attract some new fans?"

I can't think of anything worse than wheeling out a bunch of overweight TNG, DS9 and Voyager actors for a movie designed to revamp the franchise. It would need a plot drenched in implausible fanwankery to get them together in one story, and it would cater to about 17 people (and don't start using TBBS posters as indicative of what the audience wants to see).

As someone said above, I'm only interested in this movie because it's a prequel. If they churned out Star Trek:Implausible, where Picard and B9 happen to meet Lt Paris, Neelix, Worf and Chief O'Brien just in time to save the universe from Porthos' clone, I wouldn't even pirate it, let alone go and see it, and I suspect a large number of other people would feel the same. We want something fresh and new, not a recycled contrivance from Trek's failed era.

going to TOS is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 6 movies???

 

[number6]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series. It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

Hopefully new fans? Do you think Abrams went to Paramount and said "I'm going to do a movie that a few existing fans will really love and hopefully will attract some new fans?"

I can't think of anything worse than wheeling out a bunch of overweight TNG, DS9 and Voyager actors for a movie designed to revamp the franchise. It would need a plot drenched in implausible fanwankery to get them together in one story, and it would cater to about 17 people (and don't start using TBBS posters as indicative of what the audience wants to see).

As someone said above, I'm only interested in this movie because it's a prequel. If they churned out Star Trek:Implausible, where Picard and B9 happen to meet Lt Paris, Neelix, Worf and Chief O'Brien just in time to save the universe from Porthos' clone, I wouldn't even pirate it, let alone go and see it, and I suspect a large number of other people would feel the same. We want something fresh and new, not a recycled contrivance from Trek's failed era.

going to TOS is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 6 movies???

The demand for those six movies was certainly there. The demand for TNG isn't. The BO for INS and NEM proved that. Doing a Kirk and Spock era film will introduce the entire franchise to a new generation of fans. A TNG era film could never guarantee that.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

A TNG-era movie with characters from TNG, DS9 and Voyager will, if it's well-done with a well-written story and well-advertised, attract fans of those three series. It will also attract most of the fans with an interest in Star Trek and hopefully also some new fans, most likely those "newbies" who are now watching re-runs of those series all over the world.

Hopefully new fans? Do you think Abrams went to Paramount and said "I'm going to do a movie that a few existing fans will really love and hopefully will attract some new fans?"

I can't think of anything worse than wheeling out a bunch of overweight TNG, DS9 and Voyager actors for a movie designed to revamp the franchise. It would need a plot drenched in implausible fanwankery to get them together in one story, and it would cater to about 17 people (and don't start using TBBS posters as indicative of what the audience wants to see).

As someone said above, I'm only interested in this movie because it's a prequel. If they churned out Star Trek:Implausible, where Picard and B9 happen to meet Lt Paris, Neelix, Worf and Chief O'Brien just in time to save the universe from Porthos' clone, I wouldn't even pirate it, let alone go and see it, and I suspect a large number of other people would feel the same. We want something fresh and new, not a recycled contrivance from Trek's failed era.

going to TOS is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 6 movies???

Baldus is so right, good logic there sir! A movie with aged BERMAN ERA Trek characters would never get the green light for several reasons. A direct to DVD cheapie movie? Yep. But a big budgeted movie? Nope...will never happen. THANK GOD!

Rob

 

[Baldus885]

going to TOS is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 6 movies???

The movie is set before TOS. You can't get newer than something we haven't seen before. That's what a prequel is - something we haven't seen before.

 

[Bitter_Dregs]

going to TOS is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 6 movies???

going back to TNG-era Trek is hardly "fresh and new" they had what, 18 TV seasons and 4 movies???

 

[Sharr Khan]

Ultimately "Fresh and new", is not about era - or timelines, its about how the effort is carried off - Abrams and Paramount didn't want to tell a 24th Century story (well perhaps not entirely, something tells me we'll get a glimpse of that era thereabouts at some point during this film... though don't expect it to have the same design mindset at work either as what went before).

What counts is how compelling a movie that is made and as I said before I've seen nothing that causes me to think we're not going to get a compelling interesting film but rather a fresh new eyes looking at over trodden stuff supplying it with new life.

Sharr

 

[MisterPL]

Honestly, I think we need a TNG-era movie more than we need a recycled TOS.

This is the franchise's biggest problem; its fanbase is fractured.

I don't see this new film as a TOS movie. I see it as a reboot of Star Trek, ALL of Star Trek.