That's not what I am saying here.
So you're just trolling, then?
I don't think so, I think he wants to feel good about Star Trek again after all these years of being beaten down by fans of other Sci-fi movies and series. So yeah, more power to him.
Star Trek made more money under one month than...
- Thread starter StarTrek1701
- Start date
I don't think so, I think he wants to feel good about Star Trek again after all these years of being beaten down by fans of other Sci-fi movies and series. So yeah, more power to him.
But on the other hand, had Star Trek tanked, that would've been proof of how bad it was, right?
Firefly fans can still scream 8 years later about their failed tv show but I can't gush about the biggest grossing movie of 2009?That's not what I am saying here.
So you're just trolling, then?
Firefly fans can still scream 8 years later about their failed tv show but I can't gush about the biggest grossing movie of 2009?That's not what I am saying here.
So you're just trolling, then?
Hey gushing is fine. I'm just as happy as you are. But to gloat on some sort of pedantic point is classless.
And please point to me one thread on this board screaming about the cancellation of Firefly. Please.
You can't. All you can do is resort to nerd-rage. But by the power of your mighty neck-beard, go ahead continue to try and exclude people. The real fans will not try and push people of those franchises away, but try and include them in Star Trek's success, building a stronger franchise in the process.
But hey, whatever works for you.
^^ 
That's not what I am saying here.
Well, in that case I apologize for drawing the wrong inference from your OP.
What were you trying to say?
Right, so you believe Titanic is the greatest movie of all time? You squarely, firmly believe that?
Because by defintion that is what you're saying
edit: I just realised I wrote "hare it" instead of "hate it"
hares... are there hares around here.
Just finished watching the trailer. I need to see it again for a third time. Damn, such a good movie. More than we deserved.
I'm not sure it would have done much worse at the box office if it had been a worse movie. I think people were just so hungry for a new Star Trek movie after 7 years without one (the longest gap between Star Trek movies since 1979) that it would have been a hit no matter what.
Even if it had been a TNG movie, despite the failure of Nemesis, I bet a lot of people would've gone to it. They'd approach it with optimism, thinking the people behind the franchise must have learned by now what they did wrong last time enough to not make the same mistakes again. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" was a very flawed movie just like "Star Trek" (but for different reasons) and yet it still did well at the box office because people were starved for Star Trek at the time.
Even if it had been a TNG movie, despite the failure of Nemesis, I bet a lot of people would've gone to it. They'd approach it with optimism, thinking the people behind the franchise must have learned by now what they did wrong last time enough to not make the same mistakes again. "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" was a very flawed movie just like "Star Trek" (but for different reasons) and yet it still did well at the box office because people were starved for Star Trek at the time.
I don't think it would have been a hit no matter what. A TNG film (or a DS9 film or a VOY film or an ENT film) would have been another failure in my opinion, especially if it was produced on the same scale as the other TNG films.
Star Trek has been hugely successful mostly because it transformed the Trek film series into the sort of modern blockbusters that audiences respond strongly to, with FX and action set pieces that can compete with what other franchises deliver. That, together with the seven-year break and going back to the most iconic Trek characters, is the basis of the film's success.
Star Trek has been hugely successful mostly because it transformed the Trek film series into the sort of modern blockbusters that audiences respond strongly to, with FX and action set pieces that can compete with what other franchises deliver. That, together with the seven-year break and going back to the most iconic Trek characters, is the basis of the film's success.
Correct. However, when it is a quality movie like Star Trek 09, it is a good thing.
RAMA
Oh, hardly.
It would have done nothing. Trek became a hated word even among many fans at the time of Nemesis.
The movie was watchable for non fans, first one since The Voyage Home.
It was a successful reboot, a pilot for a new series of movies, it has broken even expectations.
I'm STOKED that it has done this well.
NOW, gimme a sequel with a better story!!!
As hard as it was to pull off this reboot, truly delivering the first "episode" of the new series after this "pilot" will be far harder! 
Bri
Checkmate
Commodore
...because this forum deletes posts after several months, and the brunt of the "screaming about the cancellation" occurred years ago. That's why he can't.
Which means that at such "screaming" doesn't exist or that at the least, fans have moved on. Unlike the some people here.
^ Firefly - which I know almost nothing about so I'm about as neutral as a person can be on this subject - is still listed in the tag cloud for this site, so obviously people are still talking about it here. I didn't check any of the posts, so I can't say whether they're "screaming" or not.
Last edited:
Just to note... since the switch over to vBulletin there has been no pruning of threads due to the superior software.
So? How does it being more fun make it a better movie than others?
Superman Returns sucked donkey testicles and look how much money it made. People were hyped about an up to date Superman movie with modern day tech. That didn't save it from being a terrible movie.
