|
MikeJF posted:On an adjusted-ticket-price-inflation metric, Trek '09 is top, but that's followed by TMP in second, Voyage Home, Into Darkness, Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, and then First Contact. The TNG movies just weren't a cultural thing the way the TOS movies were. But you can pretty safely say that the first four TOS movies were all mainstream success. Yes, even TMP. "Inflation adjustment" is a dodge used for purposes of argument. There are so many other factors to adjust for over time that doing a little simplistic math on the gross is meaningless. Let's not exaggerate the success of Trek movies -- in the pre-Abrams era, the box office was rarely more than just enough to keep the series going.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
MikeJF posted:On an adjusted-ticket-price-inflation metric, Trek '09 is top, but that's followed by TMP in second, Voyage Home, Into Darkness, Wrath of Khan, Search for Spock, and then First Contact. The TNG movies just weren't a cultural thing the way the TOS movies were. But you can pretty safely say that the first four TOS movies were all mainstream success. Yes, even TMP. Not a reboot hater, I think they're fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Timby posted:"Inflation adjustment" is a dodge used for purposes of argument. There are so many other factors to adjust for over time that doing a little simplistic math on the gross is meaningless. Not entirely meaningless; it does let us conclude that the first four TOS movies enjoyed similar success to each other. And given that it mixes Trek 09 and TVH near the top, it can let us conclude that the TNG movies didn't reach the level of either TOS and JJTrek by a decent shot. It also lets us conclude that Nemesis sucked arse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Positivity infusion: I like the idea of "The Frontier pushes back" as a theme for the new film. It at least says they're exploring strange new worlds and stuff, which despite being the mantra of the franchise, has been sorely lacking of late.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Based on some of the shots of what looks like some sort of desolate camp I'm hopeful it might be a refugee allegory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
Timby posted:"Inflation adjustment" is a dodge used for purposes of argument. There are so many other factors to adjust for over time that doing a little simplistic math on the gross is meaningless. I held back from jumping into this part of the discussion precisely because you're never going to get a complete apples-to-apples comparison at the box office (and yeah, simply adjusting for inflation isn't a reliable metric... though it's still quite a bit more fair than comparing unadjusted grosses from the 80s and 2010s). I'd challenge the notion that we're (I'm?) exaggerating the success of the Star Trek movies. I don't think anyone is saying Star Trek was ever on the level of Indiana Jones, Star Wars or even James Bond. But in the movies' heyday - the 80s basically - they were absolutely reaching a level of success that you couldn't hit without being mainstream. They were continually top 10 of their respective years (top 5 for TVH), often had the biggest opening weekends of the year (TMP and TWOK even set new opening weekend records) and were regarded as summer blockbusters. STV: The Final Frontier is pretty much exactly when the series took a turn (not only was it a dive at the box office, it wasn't regarded well, and this was also when people started making the "omg they're so old!" and "another Star Trek movie are you serious?" jokes) and you start seeing diminishing returns that were somewhat masked at the time by inflation. (On a minor tangent: Star Trek as a multimedia franchise actually hit a peak in the early 90s when when TNG was red-hot on TV and merchandise was everywhere and Star Trek had become almost a flagship or 'gateway drug' for all of sci-fi; the box office for TUC and Generations were considered a bit soft for not really being able to capitalize on this, not so much because there was anything wrong with their performance in absolute terms). I think by the mid-late 90s you could say the series was niche the way that you describe - First Contact, of course being the notable exception. Thing is, even "making just enough to keep the series going" is kind of taking success for granted: there are so many wannabe franchises that never get off the ground at all, let alone "keep going" after so many years. I'd describe what the reboot movies have done successfully is to ease a lot of the nerd stigma and made it less embarrassing for fans to take their friends and family to and a more acceptable option for people who just want to see the latest summer movie, and they're also starting to finally make inroads internationally. For the most part I'd say they've simply returned to the level they were at in the 80s. And yeah, I'd say with a straight face that The Voyage Home was a more popular movie than Into Darkness, at least in the US. TVH had a distinct concept and was loved across the board, people talked about ("hey did you see that crazy Star Trek movie") and quoted, etc. STID had a lot of people go see it and they liked it well enough, but aside from introducing Benedict Cumberbatch to America it was essentially Just Another Star Trek Movie, and the only people who care to talk about it much a year later are disgruntled fans. lizardman fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Drink-Mix Man posted:Based on some of the shots of what looks like some sort of desolate camp I'm hopeful it might be a refugee allegory. Bringing allegory back to Star Trek would be good. Especially if it's not about how 9/11 was an inside job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
REVENGE has been the text and subtext of the last five Star Trek films. If that changes then Beyond is a winner by default.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
We're never again going to get a deliberately paced cerebral(ish) Trek film are we?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:We're never again going to get a deliberately paced cerebral(ish) Trek film are we? You mean like The Motion Picture? No. Thank god.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:We're never again going to get a deliberately paced cerebral(ish) Trek film are we? Nah. That's okay, we'll always have TMP. The new franchise is just kind of a different beast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:We're never again going to get a deliberately paced cerebral(ish) Trek film are we? The only one to take a for-real serious shot at that was The Motion Picture really. Some of the TNG movies were boring and stupid but that's not the same thing. The good old movies were fun adventure movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:The only one to take a for-real serious shot at that was The Motion Picture really. And The Final Frontier (which is probably my second-favorite of the original cast movies, mostly because Shatner directs the poo poo out of it and Luckinbill is a revelation).
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
I made the really cool, and fun trailer into a dull and generic movie trailer. Hope you trek fans enjoy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvzKDX1cLKo I was kind of surprised that the music went pretty well with the trailer in terms of timing. Go figure! CelticPredator fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Everyone rags on TMP but I dug the poo poo out of that movie. Probably my favorite Trek movie next to Kahn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
I like TMP a lot, but it deserves the poo poo it gets. I don't have good taste.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
The Motion Picture is the boring poo poo that lead to The Next Generation. It was awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:Everyone rags on TMP but I dug the poo poo out of that movie. Probably my favorite Trek movie next to Kahn. The Motion Picture is a good movie but slow, meandering, pondering and borderline preachy isn't what the original series was (well, excepting poo poo like Let That Be Your Last Battlefield), but the movie was rather a product of Roddenberry doing a loving poo poo-ton of drinking, painkillers and LSD in the '60s and '70s and coming up with some weird-rear end vision of what the "human adventure" was going to be. That's even more reflected in the first two seasons of The Next Generation, when, after discovering cocaine in the early '80s, he had decided that no one in the future argued with each other and it was this weird, bland utopia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
wyoming posted:The Motion Picture is the boring poo poo that lead to The Next Generation. Maybe those Transformers movies are more your speed, scrub.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Another weird thing about The Motion Picture is that the story is almost entirely about V'GER, Cmdr. Decker and Lt. Ilia. Even if they get more screen time, the Enterprise crew is really just along for the ride. It's V'GER movie with special guest Star Trek.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
lizardman posted:Another weird thing about The Motion Picture is that the story is almost entirely about V'GER, Cmdr. Decker and Lt. Ilia. Even if they get more screen time, the Enterprise crew is really just along for the ride. It's V'GER movie with special guest Star Trek. That's a side-effect of the script being adapted from the pilot episode for Phase II (and Roddenberry and Livingston constantly rewriting each other on it), which featured Kirk in a cameo role, didn't have Spock at all, and was intended to introduce Decker as the new leading man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I made the really cool, and fun trailer into a dull and generic movie trailer. Hope you trek fans enjoy. lol if they had just done this it would have gone over 100% better with the average dude who posts about nerd poo poo on the internet e: goddamn fat stupid nerdlingers gettin their finger grease on my favorite intellectual properties they make liking poo poo so uncool they need to just die so it can all be for meeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Harime Nui fucked around with this message at 01:34 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
According to the standards "slow paced, cerebral, and not The Motion Picture", Star Trek has never been good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
deliberately paced. Not slow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:According to the standards "slow paced, cerebral, and not The Motion Picture", Star Trek has never been good. Pretty much. I always have a soft spot for TMP. It just feels huge and grandiose and weird. The effects and music are still great. And Spock is at his most genuinely alien. It has a rough start though, and Decker and Kirk are just kind of lovely to watch for like the first half hour, but it all kind of works out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:deliberately paced. Not slow. In that case, Star Trek is even worse. Episodes of the various series were often slow, but they were never deliberately paced.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Discussion of the nebulously defined concept of pacing should keep us plenty occupied until release date.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
I love TMP for all the normal reasons; Kirk and Spock together again, the music, spaceship porn, but I also absolutely love the plot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
I want a blu-ray director's cut with a proper colour regrade that stops all the FX from being dim as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
I also love TMP, just for the pompous grandeur of it. I wonder if that kind of movie is long past, the kind that just wallows in scifi exploration, without feeling like it has to resort to frantic action or comedy sequences. I don't think modern audiences would stomach it anymore. Like, how would a remake of Fantastic Voyage do? (I'm aware that these kinds of movies do still exist, like Europa Report, but even that has a smaller scope. They do seem to be getting rarer to me.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
Oh yeah? Well maybe YOU are a fan of the motion picture series The Transformers
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
NarkyBark posted:I also love TMP, just for the pompous grandeur of it. I wonder if that kind of movie is long past, the kind that just wallows in scifi exploration, without feeling like it has to resort to frantic action or comedy sequences. I don't think modern audiences would stomach it anymore. Like, how would a remake of Fantastic Voyage do? (I'm aware that these kinds of movies do still exist, like Europa Report, but even that has a smaller scope. They do seem to be getting rarer to me.) Audiences didn't stomach it in 1980 either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
I've asked a lot of old dudes who actually saw it when it came out and they were all like "that piece of poo poo was boring and just trying to copy Star Wars" e: Yes Redshirt was one of those old dudes
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:I've asked a lot of old dudes who actually saw it when it came out and they were all like "that piece of poo poo was boring and just trying to copy Star Wars" Copy Star Wars? It's most obvious influence was 2001.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
Well that's what I'd think too but I'm not gonna put words into their mouths. I think what they meant was "Star Wars made space poo poo profitable again and they tried to capitalize"
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:I think what they meant was "Star Wars made space poo poo profitable again and they tried to capitalize" Yes and no. Michael Eisner is famously reported to have shouted, "Jesus Christ, this could have been us!" after a screening of Star Wars. His frustration, however, was because Paramount had been developing a Star Trek feature since as early as 1971 and nothing ever came together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:Audiences didn't stomach it in 1980 either. It outdid every other TOS film, IV included. It had low profits on the books because they lumped the entire aborted Star Trek Phase 2 project budget onto it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:deliberately paced. Not slow. You smoke entirely too much weed. Wrath of Khan is a legit film though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
wyoming posted:You smoke entirely too much weed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
NarkyBark posted:I also love TMP, just for the pompous grandeur of it. I wonder if that kind of movie is long past, the kind that just wallows in scifi exploration, without feeling like it has to resort to frantic action or comedy sequences. Eh, I mean large chunks of Interstellar's run time don't really have either of those.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 06:23
|
|
