To See or Not To See?
- Thread starter DonIago
- Start date
At this point, if, IF, I go, it'll be to pay my respects to Majel.
Other than that, the whole things still seems rather pointless.
Other than that, the whole things still seems rather pointless.
And the total number of alleged non-viewers continues to hover below ten percent.
If this reboot approach to the movie was a gamble, the producers appear to have beaten the house odds.
If this reboot approach to the movie was a gamble, the producers appear to have beaten the house odds.
If this reboot approach to the movie was a gamble, the producers appear to have beaten the house odds.
Or the old-school fans have moved on and gotten lives.
Or died.
I'm just happy the studio didn't give up on new TREK after the failure of NEMESIS and early demise of ENTERPRISE. The way UPN treated that show in its last two seasons you'd think it had the Super AIDS or something.
It has yet to be proven whether or not this film is going to sufficiently appeal to movie goers who previously haven't given a fetid box of dingo's kidneys about Star Trek movies before to make up for alienating a not-insignificant segment of the established fanbase.
Don't bunch all old-school fans in with the narrow minded.
I know plenty who can't wait to see the movie.
A small percentage of the fanbase committed suicide.
You're right, very insignificant. The amount who gripe and are "Alienated"
are not near enough to worry about when making the film.
No TREK movie is going to do STAR WARS or BATMAN bucks in release. If it gets close to or nudges just over $100 million the studio will gripe somewhat because of the $150 million budget, but as long as it breaks three digits it'll probably guarantee at least one more TREK film.
If it's good it will. If it appeals to young audiences and their parents, it will. No one expected "Ironman" to be such a mega hit.
And to think that they could've spent the same amount on about seven seasons of a new Star Trek tv series.
Last edited:
Yeah...
And to think that then we would have 7 years of you whining about that tv series and its creators too.
I'm not sure who the dude in the picture is but I'm pretty sure he doesn't work for Paramount, and Paramount wasn't interested in spending any money on a Star Trek TV series (possibly because the last one was so profitable over seven seasons.)
Anyway: Have you decided to see the movie yet?
I love the original as much as the next person - have all the eps on multiple formats, have the animated series - read all the TOS books....that said, this looks fun as heck!!!!!
Will it 'change' stuff?
Will it 'take away' from the TOS?
No.....
This looks to have the spirit of the original show: it looks fun!
I am there. Any 'fan' that doesn't go because of any perceived notions that it will take away from the original is just plain nuts.
Will it 'change' stuff?
Will it 'take away' from the TOS?
No.....
This looks to have the spirit of the original show: it looks fun!
I am there. Any 'fan' that doesn't go because of any perceived notions that it will take away from the original is just plain nuts.
xortex, between this and the other thread, I think it would be a really good idea if you stuck to pertinent, on-topic posts for while. I'm seeing a lot of spam with your name on it.
Yeah, but it's spam with a big slice of cheese, and that's always a good thing. 
Would a new series have been a better gamble than a new movie? Doubtful. The ratings for new ST have been on a downward slide since DS9.
The general public only have to commit to a two-hour movie, and may become new (or revived) ST fans as a result. That's a much easier sell than seven years of a TV show, not to mention the fear that low ratings might cut it short, as they did ENT.
Oh, I plan to watch it. I'm going to download it without paying for it and then buy the Rifftrax when Mike and the gang inevitably make one.
Similar threads
