|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm watching season 2 of TNG and I think it's funny that about halfway through they decided that Data shouldn't be completely autistic all the time.
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 09:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
remusclaw posted:It's unfortunate how Data regressed in the movies. Then again, the TNG movies were all pretty off on characterization, didn't Troi lose her accent? I think Marina Sirtis forgot how to do it in the break between movies somewhere around First contact or Insurrection.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:It's unfortunate how Data regressed in the movies. Then again, the TNG movies were all pretty off on characterization, didn't Troi lose her accent? The TNG movies are all terrible in a number of spectacular ways and are a large part of why the IP took a nosedive that only recovered in 2009. Picard for example forgets his entire characterization arc from the series in First Contact, in hilarious fashion. This is generally agreed to be the "good" TNG movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
And yes I know the 2009 movie is not exactly fantastic by any stretch and Into Darkness is a shitshow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
The TOS movies enhanced the characters. The TNG movies desecrated the characters .
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 12:20
|
|
|
I'm a little baffled as to why the TNG crew got movies besides "successful tv show." Otherwise we should have gotten the DS9 spy thriller we deserved 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
HIJK posted:I'm a little baffled as to why the TNG crew got movies besides "successful tv show." Otherwise we should have gotten the DS9 spy thriller we deserved Paramount wanted a pile of 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 13:35
|
|
|
Since when do Star Trek fans deserve anything good
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
Platonicsolid posted:Paramount wanted a pile of Pretty much. CBS got their turn, time to squeeze out what's left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
Speaking of TNG and DS9 movies, I've always wodered why Worf was in the last two, in Insurrection he's just there for really poor jokes, and in Nemesis he's just kinda there. I used to think they were just bringing him back to make sure the Worf fans came to the cinema but they didn't really give him much in the way of signature moments. Then I heard that Michael Dorn would only agree to help relaunch DS9 if he was guaranteed a role in every TNG film. And suddenly it all clicked into place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Pretty much. CBS got their turn, time to squeeze out what's left. I believe they were still the same company at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:Speaking of TNG and DS9 movies, I've always wodered why Worf was in the last two, in Insurrection he's just there for really poor jokes, and in Nemesis he's just kinda there. I used to think they were just bringing him back to make sure the Worf fans came to the cinema but they didn't really give him much in the way of signature moments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:The scene in Insurrection where Worf wakes up from a nightmare aboard the Enterprise was supposed to be him dreaming about Jadzia. http://i.imgur.com/o4gm4eL.mp4
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
HIJK posted:I'm a little baffled as to why the TNG crew got movies besides "successful tv show." Otherwise we should have gotten the DS9 spy thriller we deserved Why did the TOS crew get movies, and why wouldn't that reason also have applied to TNG?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
DS9 was probably better for not getting a movie because it would have had a ton of Prophet nonsense because of the Sisko returning from the wormtemple
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:The TNG movies are all terrible in a number of spectacular ways and are a large part of why the IP took a nosedive that only recovered in 2009. Picard for example forgets his entire characterization arc from the series in First Contact, in hilarious fashion. This is generally agreed to be the "good" TNG movie. I wouldn't say Star Trek is "recovered". ST09 did okay in the box office, but general audiences have kind of forgotten it by now. The only people who really remember it are Trekkies. STID didn't do so hot. Both of them are kind of disposable Hollywood blockbusters and aren't that big in the cultural zestiest. They didn't really bring in a bunch of new fans. In fact, barely any of my friends like Star Trek. I grew up with it in the 90s and I'm one year away from being 30. Almost nobody under 30 likes Star Trek, mainly because the height of the franchise was in the 90s and it slowly declined into obscurity by the end of the decade. The last Star Trek show that was big was TNG. Right now, the "hot" "geeky" things are Star Wars, Game of Thrones, Marvel and Dr. Who. Star Trek is relatively unpopular, mainly because it hasn't been on air for a decade and its last few years on TV sucked. I doubt the new show will really "bring it back" because it's on CBS all access. The only people who will watch it are existing fans, it won't get new ones. So JJTrek hasn't really "revitalized" the franchise, if anything it just kept it running on life support. When the movie came out I was pretty hopeful that it would spawn a new TV series, but it's been 7 years. They waited a long time between movies and finally making a show. ST09 and STID are the only Star Trek things we've gotten since Enterprise was cancelled in 2004. It's been well over a decade since Trek has been on TV. The JJ movies are better than nothing, but for the most part, things feel pretty quiet on the Star Trek front.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Why did the TOS crew get movies, and why wouldn't that reason also have applied to TNG? Star wars came out. A sci-fi movie can make lots of money so they brought back star trek. They continued with TNG because they still had sets and costumes and people still went to star trek movies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:I wouldn't say Star Trek is "recovered". ST09 did okay in the box office, but general audiences have kind of forgotten it by now. The only people who really remember it are Trekkies. STID didn't do so hot. Both of them are kind of disposable Hollywood blockbusters and aren't that big in the cultural zestiest. They didn't really bring in a bunch of new fans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:Both of them are kind of disposable Hollywood blockbusters and aren't that big in the cultural zestiest. They didn't really bring in a bunch of new fans. I think that's the biggest thing. The two recent haven't really brought anything new to the table. Certain things about Star Trek are imbedded in culture. Kirk is a womanizer, you can take out a 7 foot tall lizard with a homemade cannon, there's only one good piece of fighting music, Picard makes it so and does the perfect embodiment of a face palm, resistance is futile... the list goes on. Granted, that all takes time and two movies isn't all that much screentime to make that mark, but it doesn't help when you retread so much. And while the movies have been popular among non-fans, I don't really see that as a long lasting thing. Most of it is just blockbuster chasing, not bringing new people into the fold.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Into Darkness was the highest-grossing Star Trek movie yet. It was only a failure in the critical sense. Oh, it was? I thought I heard that it under-performed. Guess I was wrong. Cojawfee posted:Star wars came out. A sci-fi movie can make lots of money so they brought back star trek. They continued with TNG because they still had sets and costumes and people still went to star trek movies. Yeah, if anything brings back Star Trek, it will be Star Wars. I mean, Star Wars is literally why the TOS movies and TNG were even made. And a lot of Trekkies still hate Star Wars. If anything, they should be thankful. bull3964 posted:I think that's the biggest thing. The two recent haven't really brought anything new to the table. Certain things about Star Trek are imbedded in culture. Kirk is a womanizer, you can take out a 7 foot tall lizard with a homemade cannon, there's only one good piece of fighting music, Picard makes it so and does the perfect embodiment of a face palm, resistance is futile... the list goes on. Yeah. I just feel like they haven't really made much of a lasting impression, you know? For one, they probably waited too long between movies and waiting too long for a TV show that will be airing on a subscription service no one will buy to really leave a mark. The amount of actual Star Trek content we've gotten over the past decade has been super, super sparse. All we've really gotten is 2 movies and a mediocre MMO no one plays. GET IN THE ROBOT fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Into Darkness was the highest-grossing Star Trek movie yet. It was only a failure in the critical sense. Worldwide. That's an important distinction to make. It was the highest grossing worldwide at a time when Asian markets are on the rise. It earned less than 2009 domestically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:I doubt the new show will really "bring it back" because it's on CBS all access. The only people who will watch it are existing fans, it won't get new ones. loving this. If you launch a show nowadays on a paid streaming service that is not Netflix or Hulu, it is doomed to die. Hardcore fans will seek it out, though many will probably  it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
The Dark One posted:I think Marina Sirtis forgot how to do it in the break between movies somewhere around First contact or Insurrection. Well, that and she did the accent in the beginning, then Majel just ignored it and talked in her normal voice... so I think Piller said "Oh, it was your dad's accent and you picked it up as you grew up" and then they cast Troi's dad for flashbacks and that actor talked in a Mid-West accent, so Marina kinda went 'gently caress it' and talked like the London girl she actually is because if no-one else is going to try, why should she?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Star wars came out. A sci-fi movie can make lots of money so they brought back star trek. They continued with TNG because they still had sets and costumes and people still went to star trek movies. Paramount had been discussing a Trek movie as early as 1974, and might well have gotten one out prior to Star Wars if Roddenberry hadn't dug his heels in over minor money issues. (Not as in "oh, money is so minor, this is art we're talking about", but as in "nickles and dimes")
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Paramount had been discussing a Trek movie as early as 1974, and might well have gotten one out prior to Star Wars if Roddenberry hadn't dug his heels in over minor money issues. (Not as in "oh, money is so minor, this is art we're talking about", but as in "nickles and dimes") I would have liked to have seen the Spock kills Kennedy movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
HIJK posted:I'm a little baffled as to why the TNG crew got movies besides "successful tv show." Otherwise we should have gotten the DS9 spy thriller we deserved DS9 was hardly "successful." It's the best Trek television show, by far, but no one watched it. Platonicsolid posted:Paramount wanted a pile of Also, Paramount wanted to move the cast over to movies, because everyone's contracts were up after Season 7, and Stewart and Spiner especially would have been grossly expensive to book for filming ten months out of the year again. And really, at that point, Trek movies were a cheap way to pick up $40 million or so in profit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Timby posted:DS9 was hardly "successful." It's the best Trek television show, by far, but no one watched it. It was a little ahead of its time in that it was a serialized TV show in the age before Netflix. In fact, I'm pretty sure that nobody realized DS9 was good until Netflix became a thing. That said, I'm pretty sure I've read that it has better ratings than Voyager, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:It was a little ahead of its time in that it was a serialized TV show in the age before Netflix. In fact, I'm pretty sure that nobody realized DS9 was good until Netflix became a thing. People have been raving about DS9 for a bit longer than Netflix dude. Part of what brought me to SA was the strong Trek fandom in the GBS thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:In fact, I'm pretty sure that nobody realized DS9 was good until Netflix became a thing. The only people who could legitimately think this must have been born in, like, 1997.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Timby posted:The only people who could legitimately think this must have been born in, like, 1997. I was born in '87 but didn't really see DS9 a lot when it aired. Instead I mostly saw the TOS movies, reruns of TNG and a friend of mine really liked Voyager. In my defense, I was like 10 years old when DS9 ended so you can't blame me for being a stupid kid with bad taste. It was only after the show went off the air that I watched it and went "yeah, this is really good!" after being told it was actually very good. I watched it when Netflix had just become a thing and they literally mailed you DVDs instead of having a streaming service, so it was probably around 2007 or so. In fact, it might have been SA that made me watch DS9 because I got an account around then. Edit: also Jesus gently caress, I've been on this dang forum for almost 10 years GET IN THE ROBOT fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:It's unfortunate how Data regressed in the movies. Then again, the TNG movies were all pretty off on characterization, didn't Troi lose her accent? I think she lost the accent somewhere during the show's run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:It was a little ahead of its time in that it was a serialized TV show in the age before Netflix. In fact, I'm pretty sure that nobody realized DS9 was good until Netflix became a thing. Voyager briefly had higher ratings than DS9 when it launched, but after that start, which wasn't as highly rated as DS9's had been, they fell off a cliff, much like DS9 (and Enterprise for that matter) did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:I was born in '87 but didn't really see DS9 a lot when it aired. That's what I meant by "no one watched it." The viewership was so low in the early goings that the syndicates just bounced it around its timeslots. I remember one of the season premieres aired in Chicago at midnight on WGN. Edit: I remember, it was The Way of the Warrior. The premiere of a season that was literally make-or-break for the show and it aired on loving midnight, on a Saturday, in one of the country's biggest markets. Timby fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
skasion posted:Voyager briefly had higher ratings than DS9 when it launched, but after that start, which wasn't as highly rated as DS9's had been, they fell off a cliff, much like DS9 (and Enterprise for that matter) did. Well, that's kind of apples and oranges. Voyager was a network show in primetime (flagship launch show no less), DS9 was syndicated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Timby posted:DS9 was hardly "successful." It's the best Trek television show, by far, but no one watched it. Kent on Veep seems to have liked it--it got a great shoutout at the end of season 5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Timby posted:That's what I meant by "no one watched it." The viewership was so low in the early goings that the syndicates just bounced it around its timeslots. I remember one of the season premieres aired in Chicago at midnight on WGN. I didn't even really know when it was on or what channel. I would tune in to random episodes of TNG, VOY and TOS but almost never saw DS9 aired. I didn't really schedule times like "oh, there's a new Star Trek episode at 7pm on X day!" moreso that I would just channel surf and watch random Trek episodes sometimes. I'm pretty sure I mostly used to watch Star Trek on UPN and Sci-Fi when those channels were actually things. I guess SyFy still technically exists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:And a lot of Trekkies still hate Star Wars. If anything, they should be thankful. My favorite subspecies of that type are the ones who think for some reason that Star Trek is hard science fiction, and look down on all that space fantasy stuff in Star Wars. "The Force? That's just goofy. Ghosts and telekinesis and seeing the future have no place in science fiction. Now let's all watch Wolf in the Fold, Plato's Stepchildren, and Cause and Effect to get the taste of it out of our mouths."
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Timby posted:The only people who could legitimately think this must have been born in, like, 1997. Also, the explosion of serialized TV predates Netflix anyway. It really started taking off in the late 90s and early 00s. DS9 was a little ahead of its time, but only a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Also, the explosion of serialized TV predates Netflix anyway. It really started taking off in the late 90s and early 00s. DS9 was a little ahead of its time, but only a little bit. Serialized shows before that were like Dallas and poo poo. X-Files proved that a cinematic style, serialized show could be popular and profitable. The Sopranos afterwards was the gold standard. Then Lost came around later and everyone thought "I need to write something with a Mystery angle and also it needs to be serialized with dangling plot threads I pull out of my rear end."
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:33
|
|