To be fair a 6.0 rating or more which 3 of the ST series usually achieved would be excellent today. I think Voyager had some respectable numbers. Enterprise is unfortunate because people weren't watching when the quality improved. Oh well.
Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?
- Thread starter Lance
- Start date
To be fair a 6.0 rating or more which 3 of the ST series usually achieved would be excellent today. I think Voyager had some respectable numbers. Enterprise is unfortunate because people weren't watching when the quality improved. Oh well.
It's slightly under, however remember the climate of the times, in 1979, there had been no new Trek in 10 years, there was a groundswell of support, and 3-4 blockbuster scifi projects had come about, there was Star Wars-like anticipation.
In 2009, ST was at low ebb...7 years away from the theaters, a failed TV series 4 years earlier and almost no buzz till right before the movie came out to anyone other than a Trekkie. In this context, ST09 handily beat expectations, and STTMP came nowhere near SW.
How do u explain this then: STTMP was 5th most popular movie at box office in 1979 compare to ST09 13th in 2009. We can maybe argue ST09 is the winner in US market but overseas & worldwide STMP is the winner.
Where are you getting your numbers from that TMP did better worldwide? Trek has never done that well overseas.
Many sites like f.e. http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1979/0ST01.php says STTMP grossed $139 million worldwide divide by average ticket prize for 1979 $ 2.51 = 55.378 million x $7.50 (average ticket prize for 2009) = $414.3 million worldwide
p.s you are right about Trek not preforming good overseas but at the time. Shortly after Star Wars there was great hype for syfy movies that i am guessing helped STMP overseas great deal..
p.s you are right about Trek not preforming good overseas but at the time. Shortly after Star Wars there was great hype for syfy movies that i am guessing helped STMP overseas great deal..
Also important: I believe Star Trek: The Motion Picture was in theatres for quite a bit longer than Star Trek was.
With inflated ticket prices, that's not saying much to barely "beat" a film released in 1979. Then again, no one even talks about the film, so that may say much about the lack of cultural heat surrounding the film.
That's why those statistics adjust for inflation. Domestically, Star Trek (2009) sold more tickets than Star Trek--The Motion Picture (1979).
http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/20/sta...mce-most-attended-film-in-franchise-domestic/
http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/20/sta...mce-most-attended-film-in-franchise-domestic/
Was moving TNG to the big screen a bad decision?
I would say no, but I do think that the move was rushed, especially in the case of Star Trek Generations - review here:
http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/
I'd also contend that ST:TNG never really had a proper movie on the big screen! TNG was an ensemble peice, unlike TOS, which had the big 3 characters. I think that it needed a writer and director that appreciated this - someone like Jos Whedon, whose Serenity movie and Avengers film both catered for the ensemble casts.
I would say no, but I do think that the move was rushed, especially in the case of Star Trek Generations - review here:
http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/
I'd also contend that ST:TNG never really had a proper movie on the big screen! TNG was an ensemble peice, unlike TOS, which had the big 3 characters. I think that it needed a writer and director that appreciated this - someone like Jos Whedon, whose Serenity movie and Avengers film both catered for the ensemble casts.
Well it would be more accurate to say ST doesn't do very well in certain markets overseas for example ST (2009) did ~US$128 of which some ~US$35.4 (or around 28%) came from just one market the UK. The next two closest where Germany and Australi with around US$12.7m.
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=startrek11.htm
So it would seem that US and UK are the key markets for a ST film. I suspect that for the many films this is true, the English speaking countries are the markets from which films make the most money.
While I agree, the problem is that Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner would have never agreed to the films being ensemble pieces like the series was. For that matter, neither would Paramount. By the time of the films, they were considered "the big stars" and, as such, they got the major plotlines and also a lot of input into the stories. Which hurt the stories, IMHO.
First Contact did the best job of the four films, IMHO, at utilizing the ensemble, but even that was a bit too much of the Picard and Data show for my tastes.
Paramount forgot what it was that made TNG successful when they moved it to the big screen. Unfortunately, that is fairly standard for Hollywood.
a "proper movie?"
FC was very well-reviewed, did very well at the box office, was well-received by fans, remains popular, and did the best job of giving all the characters something to do.(except perhaps Bev again, sadly)
what exactly is your definition of a proper movie?
Yeah, FC starts strong, but the absurdly melodramtic Picard and Data and Evil Hottie third act just scuttles it for me. For moi, Generations remains the best.
For moi, Generations remains the best.
It's sad to say, but I think Nemesis is aging the best out of the four TNG film outings. It definitely has a "big-screen" feel the other films lack.
Though Generations gets points for showing us the Enterprise-D on the big-screen.
It wasn't a mistake to move the TNG franchise to the big screen, as TNG was fizzling out and I think it's good they ended on a high note. The mistake was not in deciding to put the franchise on the big screen, but in how they did it.
Generations just wasn't well thought out and the plot really made no sense. A climax of three old guys wrestling on a mountain top just falls flat too. Not to mention Kirk died like that? I can't blame Shatner at all for resurrecting Kirk in his novels.
First Contact... well it was the high water mark. Still a lot of plot holes and inconsistencies, but this was the franchises best attempt at pulling off an action flick. Though turning Picard into an action hero just isn't convincing.
Insurrection... another plot that makes no sense at all and just has the feel of a TNG episode... and not a very good one. But hey the Riker/Troi fans finally get something after over ten years.
Nemesis... and the final nail in the coffin. Wonderful close up shots that just show us how old our heroes(and the franchise) have gotten. Everyone in this movie is just dumb... or the plot makes no sense, take your pick. The graphics and effects were great, but even the Enterprise and Scimitar exchanging fire for... 30 minutes... gets dull.
Generations just wasn't well thought out and the plot really made no sense. A climax of three old guys wrestling on a mountain top just falls flat too. Not to mention Kirk died like that? I can't blame Shatner at all for resurrecting Kirk in his novels.
First Contact... well it was the high water mark. Still a lot of plot holes and inconsistencies, but this was the franchises best attempt at pulling off an action flick. Though turning Picard into an action hero just isn't convincing.
Insurrection... another plot that makes no sense at all and just has the feel of a TNG episode... and not a very good one. But hey the Riker/Troi fans finally get something after over ten years.
Nemesis... and the final nail in the coffin. Wonderful close up shots that just show us how old our heroes(and the franchise) have gotten. Everyone in this movie is just dumb... or the plot makes no sense, take your pick. The graphics and effects were great, but even the Enterprise and Scimitar exchanging fire for... 30 minutes... gets dull.
I liked Generations and First Contact, not so much Insurrection and Nemesis, but really pretty meh about all four of them. Generations seemed sort of weird and incomplete, but it was good seeing good old 1701-D one last time. First Contact was really entertaining, but that's about it. We've all read Moby Dick in tenth grade - we get it. The last two simply felt like they were making movies because they were obligated to make movies.
I've never felt like Star Trek translated well to the big screen. I like the TOS movies (well four of them) well enough, but they lost the campy fun and color of the series. The TNG movies lost the thoughtfulness. If I were to take every episode and movie of Star Trek ever made and list them in order of most to least favorite, I'd probably list about 300 TV episodes before hitting the first movie.
I've never felt like Star Trek translated well to the big screen. I like the TOS movies (well four of them) well enough, but they lost the campy fun and color of the series. The TNG movies lost the thoughtfulness. If I were to take every episode and movie of Star Trek ever made and list them in order of most to least favorite, I'd probably list about 300 TV episodes before hitting the first movie.
Similar threads
