Why didn't Beyond do better at the Box Office?

[Rahul]

What he meant was that the Abrams films aren't what he wants. It is disingenuous to say that they aren't "sci-fl". People should say what they mean.

I say what I mean. Just because you misunderstand me to a point that I have to ask if it is intentional doesn't make it disingenuous. I clarified it for you in the previous post, even though it really is obvious. Calling me names because I'm indifferent to something you like is not necessary.

 

[Jedi_Master]

You really need to stop the straw-man here!

I'm not boycotting anything. I'm just not interest. They want to sell me a product. If I don't like it, I won't buy it. If they find enough other people that buy it - no problem for them. If they don't - shame.

So if the successful local restaurant stops carrying your favorite item not only will you no longer go there - even to join your friends who love the restaurant - you will actively and publicly proclaim that the restaurant needs to "go back to it's roots", "remember that it is a niche restaurant", and actively engage fans of the restaurant in various discussion groups, reminding them that your declarative statements about the restaurant are based on insider sources and are "well supported."

 

[BillJ]

WOK is a sci-fi story...

The Wrath of Khan is pretty far from your definition of sci-fi, honestly. It is a story about aging and revenge. The Genesis Device is a macguffin to force the confrontation between Kirk and Khan. Most of Star Trek uses sci-fi trappings to tell very down to earth stories.

You don't even seem to understand your own definition of sci-fi.

 

[Rahul]

So if the successful local restaurant stops carrying your favorite item not only will you no longer go there - even to join your friends who love the restaurant - you will actively and publicly proclaim that the restaurant needs to "go back to it's roots", "remember that it is a niche restaurant", and actively engage fans of the restaurant in various discussion groups, reminding them that your declarative statements about the restaurant are based on insider sources and are "well supported."

Link please

 

[Jedi_Master]

Attempting to define how a specific piece of entertainment with a large variety of elements precisely fits into a very broad "genre" usually leads to contradictions.

 

[locutus101]

The Wrath of Khan is pretty far from your definition of sci-fi, honestly. It is a story about aging and revenge. The Genesis Device is a macguffin to force the confrontation between Kirk and Khan. Most of Star Trek uses sci-fi trappings to tell very down to earth stories.

You don't even seem to understand your own definition of sci-fi.

Actually, the story is loosely inspired from Mobi dick . There are even several allusions in the movie.

 

[BillJ]

I think one of the biggest things the original Star Trek taught me growing up, was that sci-fi was a very broad palette that could be used to tell all kinds of different stories. There were no limits.

 

[Noname Given]

Sci-fi is not a setting. You can tell literally any story in a sci-fi setting. Be it a love story, a war story, or an action story. Doesn't make it a sci-fi story.

I should have been more precise: I think Star Trek should do sci-fi stories. Those are usually high-concept. But aren't limited to it. WOK is a sci-fi story, even though it has only limited sci-fi elements.

WOK is a revenge/vengence story in a science fiction setting. There's nothing really overly 'science fiction' about it aside from tjhe Cryogenic aspect of Kahn's backstory - hell even Eugenics (IE selective breeding - isn't science fiction).

 

[Jedi_Master]

I think one of the biggest things the original Star Trek taught me growing up, was that sci-fi was a very broad palette that could be used to tell all kinds of different stories. There were no limits.

IDIC baby! Be sure to add shipping and handling. Don't want Gene's Vision™ to run low on funds.

 

[Rahul]

The Wrath of Khan is pretty far from your definition of sci-fi, honestly. It is a story about aging and revenge. The Genesis Device is a macguffin to force the confrontation between Kirk and Khan. Most of Star Trek uses sci-fi trappings to tell very down to earth stories.

You don't even seem to understand your own definition of sci-fi.

I'm just going to repeat myself here, since literally every point still applies:

I say what I mean. Just because you misunderstand me to a point that I have to ask if it is intentional doesn't make it disingenuous. I clarified it for you in the previous post, even though it really is obvious. Calling me names because I'm indifferent to something you like is not necessary.

 

[BillJ]

Calling me names because I'm indifferent to something you like is not necessary.

No one has called you a name. There is a pattern to your posts where you make things up when the argument isn't going your way. This isn't the first thread where I've noticed it.

IDIC baby! Be sure to add shipping and handling. Don't want Gene's Vision™ to run low on funds.

People now try to use "sci-fi" as some kind of code word for a special club for self-proclaimed geniuses. IDIC doesn't even factor in. If it isn't exactly what they want they proclaim it a failure and not "sci-fi".

 

[Rahul]

WOK is a revenge/vengence story in a science fiction setting. There's nothing really overly 'science fiction' about it aside from tjhe Cryogenic aspect of Kahn's backstory - hell even Eugenics (IE selective breeding - isn't science fiction).

Revenge is certainly the main motivator for the plot. And the "Moby Dick IN SPACE!" allegory sure has some validity to it.

That doesn't change the fact that TWOK is, deep down to it's core, a sci-fi movie, where every piece of character motivation, backstory, worldbuilding, setting and plot point is deeply rooted in science fiction. The whole piece is basically an examination of the relationship between technology and man. Told through a simple revenge story.

 

[Noname Given]

Revenge is certainly the main motivator for the plot. And the "Moby Dick IN SPACE!" allegory sure has some validity to it.

That doesn't change the fact that TWOK is, deep down to it's core, a sci-fi movie, where every piece of character motivation, backstory, worldbuilding, setting and plot point is deeply rooted in science fiction. The whole piece is basically an examination of the relationship between technology and man. Told through a simple revenge story.

^^^
If that really is your argument they Star Trek Beyond IS a science fiction film as well.

 

[BillJ]

^^^
If that really is your argument they Star Trek Beyond IS a science fiction film as well.

Can I "like" this twice?

 

[locutus101]

^^^
If that really is your argument they Star Trek Beyond IS a science fiction film as well.

It is beyond science.

 

[Rahul]

No one has called you a name. There is a pattern to your posts where you make things up when the argument isn't going your way. This isn't the first thread where I've noticed it.

Using distractions like saying "people" make false claims and being disingenuous when you are talking about me only shows that "people here" have mastered the art of insult by proxy. Not calling people personally out, even though it's quite obvious what "they" mean.

People now try to use "sci-fi" as some kind of code word for a special club for self-proclaimed geniuses. IDIC doesn't even factor in. If it isn't exactly what they want they proclaim it a failure and not "sci-fi".

This has to be literally the very first time somebody said sci-fi is used as a "cool" special meanings word.

To clarify: I call 'Beyond' a failure because it is. Completely independant of weather or not it's scifi. I just said that I like sci-fi. And the obvious, that "sci-fi" has been a big part of Star Trek in the past.

 

[Rahul]

^^^
If that really is your argument they Star Trek Beyond IS a science fiction film as well.

I cannot say anything about that, since I haven't seen Beyond yet. And I would be extremely delighted if you or any others won't fill this thread with spoilers. I can only discuss the previous two Trek movies in content, my comments on 'Beyond' are purely based on public promotional material, and the box office results (which this thread is specifically about)

note: edited for clarification

 

[BillJ]

And the obvious, that "sci-fi" has been a big part of Star Trek in the past.

So has plain old fashion drama and comedy. Stories that could easily be told even if their were no sci-fi trappings involved.

 

[BillJ]

...and the box office results (which this thread is specifically about)

How do box office results determine whether or not a film is "sci-fi"?

 

[Rahul]

So has plain old fashion drama and comedy. Stories that could easily be told even if their were no sci-fi trappings involved.

Yep. But there certainly is better drama and comedy than Star Trek. What makes Star Trek special specifically for me personal is the science fiction aspect. That's purely my take though.

How do box office results determine whether or not a film is "sci-fi"?

It doesn't, and I never said so. (again: nice strawman). But the box office is one of the results of public perception of those Trek movies. Which is what we were talking about since the last few hours...