The Last Jedi trailer has 16.5 million views in less than 24 hours.
- Thread starter PixelMagic
- Start date
pretty much this.
like others have said, star wars had always been more popular anyway so it's only natural that their new movies have a bigger appeal. That, and the fact that the first movie of the new trilogy was pretty successful and people are super excited for a sequel. AND the fans also didn't have to wait too much time before they got a sequel, unlike us. So the excitement is still alive, so to speak. That counts a lot. They have better marketing too. These guys know what they are doing IMO, having a spin off like 'rogue one' in between also was a great move.
We had something a tad similar for the first movie with people being very excited about a sequel...but, two sequels in, it honestly feels like they mostly wasted the potential the first movie created and gave us two sequels that, more or less, maybe weren't what the audience that made the first one successful was expecting. For me, the first movie gave me hope but the sequels were a bit like a reality check about trek being stuck in the past and doomed by its fandom a bit (mostly haters, but honestly even some of us who like the reboot want to have the cake and eat it too, thus are guilty of being blind to the fact that nostalgia ultimately is a huge hindrance somethimes).
Star wars does have nostalgia too, but it's not like in trek. IDK, it just feels like they are still allowed more freedom to offer new things.
Some people also understimate how much a fandom can influence things on the negative side and even create a false perception of a movie being a flop when it actually really isn't by the facts (e.g., stid). All that negativity might ruin the party for those who like this reboot.
What's more? Well, maybe the fact we lost JJ as a director AND the original team isn't exactly great either and doesn't inspire confidence about there being any cohesion and 'continuity' here. With star wars, they already have a story they want to tell in their trilogy so each movie will really be a sequel of the previous one adding more pieces to the puzzle. The reboot movies feel more standalone, especially Beyond.
Also... yes, it honestly is like some of the guys behind the scenes are trying to sabotage this franchise a bit when it had all the potential to become maybe not as big as marvel and others, but surely very successful. It's like they fail at understanding basic marketing moves, and what's the stuff they should offer to nowadays audiences to make a movie more successful. I really don't get it.
It's almost comical how they 'took' the criticism stid got for its homages, for example, and thought that Beyond would 'fix' that and attract new fans by being a movie that is all about tos nostalgia and has even more homages than stid did.. and distanced itself even more from the first movie (that was a big success! I could understand if it was a failure but it wasn't one so I don't get what's the utility of distancing themsevels from the first movie)
From what I remember, stid, and in part the first movie too, was also criticized for being too much stuck in earth and less about a spaceship exploring space.. and what we get? a movie where they destroy the enterprise at the very beginning and then 'stuck' the characters in one place for most of the movie; we didn't even really *see* altamid and any mysterious unknown alien race if you think about it.
I mean, I get why Lin wanted to destroy the enterprise, but aside from the fact that the idea isn't that 'new', I think it inevitably removed from the movie something that might be one of the biggest appeals for the kind of audience these movies are ultimately made for. Fast&Furious.. without the cars.
Last edited:
I've heard this argument before and it always leaves me surprised. Disney has made two Star Wars movies so far… and the first is a scene by scene remake of Episode IV, and the second is a direct prequel to Episode IV! Talk about nostalgia! Imagine what would Trek fans say if Paramount did the same to Star Trek!
Agree! I think sometimes we don't all take the animated shows seriously, but a Trek animated show would go a long way towards increasing the longevity of the franchise.
DSC will probably do so, like STNG did, but that younger age range, maybe 4-10 years old would probably get a jolt from a cartoon series.
RAMA
DSC will probably do so, like STNG did, but that younger age range, maybe 4-10 years old would probably get a jolt from a cartoon series.
RAMA
Actually, it's worse than getting nothing. We could have had something in the form of the novels that were planned in summer 2010. Now I know in the grand scheme of things the novels are small potatoes that wouldn't have contributed very much investment, but it would still have been given the new universe a presence. After Trek XI's release there was the Nero comic series a few months later, but then nothing. The Kelvin universe had no new content until IDW's Ongoing series began in late 2011. Trek XI introduced a whole new Trek universe to be explored by old and new fans alike, but it was squandered by not having anything for fans to explore aside from one movie. The novels could have been a critical step towards striking while the iron was hot. True they were due out a year a year after the movie's release, but their covers and blurbs were made public around the time of the movie's DVD release when it was still very much in the public eye, and anyone wanting to further look into this new universe would quickly see "oh, new novels next summer, cool." Instead those novels were pulled (with no explanation) and the Kelvin universe got nothing else while the public was willing to invest in it.
STID's delays sure as hell didn't help matters either. It's even worse now that we know the main reason behind the delays is because Orci and Lindelof spent an entire year arguing over whether on not to bring Khan back. And the decision to bring him back is now considered polarized at best among fans. That whole matter was terribly handled too. So they decided to bring back Khan in part because he's supposedly Star Trek's most famous villain, Kirk's Moriarty or Joker. But instead of advertising it, they stayed quiet about.
Hell, even if they wanted to keep it a secret that Khan was in the movie, half the job is done by the fact he used an alias for half the movie. What they should have done when Cumberbatch was cast was state right away he was playing "John Harrison" but instead, we go nearly a year of Cumberbatch's role being unidentified completely, further leaving a void of information. To be honest, when the filmmakers are refusing to say anything about the movies in advance, how do they expect to drum up interest in the public and make them interested?
Abrams's wish to embargo everything else in Star Trek was a extreme in the opposite direction, and just made him look like a petulant child with an attitude of "my Star Trek only, or nothing!" Star Wars and Doctor Who have built popularity and success with their new productions without placing an embargo on previous works in their respective franchises, there's no reason why Star Trek should have to.
The situations were different. I'm not sure Disney/Lucasfilm would keep pumping out merchandise based on the older iteration, if they were pushing movies based on a rebooted universe (instead of a continuation).
I'm not so sure that Trek competing with itself was good for the franchise.
I really don't see any competition, I see preference. Just as nowadays we have people choosing TOS calendars over ENT calendars, or TNG toys, or DS9 novels, etc., we would have people buying ShatnerKirk stuff or preferring PineKirk products. It's still one brand.
It's not like Disney will stop producing FordSolo action figures once the EhrenreichSolo movie is be out for fear of brand "competition".
Star Trek is much more a niche product, and dividing dollars only ends up hurting the values of the various licenses.
The mass market figures will likely look close enough that you won't be able to tell the difference.
By that logic we already have Trek competing with itself and dividing dollars. There's the "TOS property" vs the "TNG property" vs the "DS9 property" vs VOY vs ENT vs Movies. We have people buying Trek novels but not Trek toys. We have people buying Trek models but not Trek action figures, etc. We have people collecting all of TOS' merchadising or collecting TNG's merchadising only. That's not "dividing dollars", that's supplying the market and covering all bases, needs and tastes.
Let me ask you this. When TNG started did CBS/P stopped producing TOS collectibles? When VOY started did CBS/P stopped producing TNG collectibles? Or did Lucasfilm stopped producing Original Trilogy SW collectibles when the Prequel Trilogy films started? Of course not. That would be absurd. The same thing if ALL of the Prime Universe collectibles stopped completely and were replaced with Kelvin Timeline ONLY merchandise.
No they won't. First because Lucasfilm has always protected it's brand and secondly because action figures have come a lot way since 1977, even in the small 3 3/4" scale. Today's figures have amazing likenesses of actors and great articulation. If you saw any of The Force Awakens Han Solo figures they were completely new molds with a very good (73-year-old) Harrison Ford likeness. They weren't just some old Han Solo figures slapped with grey color hair. Not to mention that many actors have merchandising clauses with likeness approvals in their contracts.
Unfortunately, there is also the retro figure movement with things like Star Trek, and even Star Wars. I really wish Star Trek would move forward with its figures rather than backwards.
We did. Witness Into Darkness' homages to Wrath of Khan / Space Seed.
Then good for us. The point of a reboot (even a soft one) is to get rid of the baggages of the old continuity and tell fresh new stories, not devoting a whole movie to silly homages or remakes.
It's from Forbes. Forbes is never relevant.
Since it was stated last year that Paramount had looked to Guardians of the Galaxy as an example of what box office success Star Trek could also enjoy, I should point out that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 has been out only 1 week and made more money than Beyond has in 10 months. Sigh.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4290&p=.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4290&p=.htm
STB would've been well chuffed with 425 as its total ww take
I loved Rogue One (way more than I thought I would), but The Force Awakens reminded me more of Star Trek 2009 than it should have. If you split the character of Kirk into two, the elements of dwelling in some obscure place and being destined for greater things would make up Rey and all the forced attempts at broad comedy would make up Finn.
Last edited:
My only disagreement on this is that I don't feel like any one ever told Rey she was destined for great things, and thought that Finn was distinct enough as a character to stand up on his own.
But, yeah, I loved Rogue One way more than I should have, though TFA eeks it out for rewatch value for me. But, ST 09 beats both of them.
But, yeah, I loved Rogue One way more than I should have, though TFA eeks it out for rewatch value for me. But, ST 09 beats both of them.
Star Wars will always be far more popular than Trek, and even given both are iconic sci-fi franchises, Star Wars is uber cool while Trek is uber geeky; faintly ridiculous really. For me, Star Trek is and always was far superior to Star Wars; the most recent Trek films I have found far more satisfying than TFA and Rogue One.
I must say I have loved the Kelvin universe trilogy, with STID being not only my favourite of the new films but along with TWOK perhaps my favourite Star Trek film of all. I became a fan of Trek back in the 80s, the advent of TNG brought the franchise to an entirely new audience and with it an interest in the back catalogue so to speak. Discovering the films after seeing STIV:TVH in the cinema (and almost every Trek film since), the Trek movie franchise has been long my favourite. Most of my circle preferred Star Wars, and while I enjoyed the films very much, I couldn't see why the original trilogy was considered better than the Trek films. The characterisation, the dialogue, the story telling - Trek simply engaged me on a different level than the more simplistic Wars.
The newer films, from the moment I viewed ST09, I knew they'd got it right. The actors were perfectly chosen, and it did really feel as if the originals had been brought back in younger incarnations. The dialogue in all three films is so well written, and so character driven, it is obvious the films are written by people knowledgeable with the Trek universe. The craft was there - those little but important scenes or exchanges between characters, specifically in STID ("Enough with the metaphors Bones!" - "yes, ya mad bastard" Scotty to Kirk..etc..etc), even room for nuance in a big summer blockbuster; the central theme of ethics and how far would you go to protect the ones you love. I can understand why fans were in uproar with the mirroring of TWOK, but as a film I found it both incredible entertaining as well as holding a powerful central question. The interaction of the characters was wonderful throughout; a very well crafted film.
The crafting in the writing and film making I found superior to both most recent Star Wars films; though the pair are leagues better than the prequel trilogy, the more black & white world of Star Wars (the First Order are simply evil without any nuance - good guys Vs bad guys without the subtle shades of grey Trek introduces). The dialogue and characterisation in the prequels was horrendous, with the convoluted political story all adding to a thoroughly underwhelming experience.
However, Star Trek will always be considered on the geekier side, though friends and family who have viewed any of the new trilogy in the cinema have marvelled at how good they were. The new films feel like Trek to me, many reviewers have remarked that they are quality blockbusters but don't contain that Trek ingredient; I disagree and feel they absolutely contain it.
I must say I have loved the Kelvin universe trilogy, with STID being not only my favourite of the new films but along with TWOK perhaps my favourite Star Trek film of all. I became a fan of Trek back in the 80s, the advent of TNG brought the franchise to an entirely new audience and with it an interest in the back catalogue so to speak. Discovering the films after seeing STIV:TVH in the cinema (and almost every Trek film since), the Trek movie franchise has been long my favourite. Most of my circle preferred Star Wars, and while I enjoyed the films very much, I couldn't see why the original trilogy was considered better than the Trek films. The characterisation, the dialogue, the story telling - Trek simply engaged me on a different level than the more simplistic Wars.
The newer films, from the moment I viewed ST09, I knew they'd got it right. The actors were perfectly chosen, and it did really feel as if the originals had been brought back in younger incarnations. The dialogue in all three films is so well written, and so character driven, it is obvious the films are written by people knowledgeable with the Trek universe. The craft was there - those little but important scenes or exchanges between characters, specifically in STID ("Enough with the metaphors Bones!" - "yes, ya mad bastard" Scotty to Kirk..etc..etc), even room for nuance in a big summer blockbuster; the central theme of ethics and how far would you go to protect the ones you love. I can understand why fans were in uproar with the mirroring of TWOK, but as a film I found it both incredible entertaining as well as holding a powerful central question. The interaction of the characters was wonderful throughout; a very well crafted film.
The crafting in the writing and film making I found superior to both most recent Star Wars films; though the pair are leagues better than the prequel trilogy, the more black & white world of Star Wars (the First Order are simply evil without any nuance - good guys Vs bad guys without the subtle shades of grey Trek introduces). The dialogue and characterisation in the prequels was horrendous, with the convoluted political story all adding to a thoroughly underwhelming experience.
However, Star Trek will always be considered on the geekier side, though friends and family who have viewed any of the new trilogy in the cinema have marvelled at how good they were. The new films feel like Trek to me, many reviewers have remarked that they are quality blockbusters but don't contain that Trek ingredient; I disagree and feel they absolutely contain it.
Similar threads
