|
Sir Lemming posted:It's too early to say, but it'd be funny if JJ Abrams killed both Star Trek and Star Wars. Kinda wrong on both counts. - ‘09 and STID were both (relatively) huge financial successes. Paramount killed Movie Trek by not bothering to promote Beyond until the last possible minute during a year that gave them a huge potential for nostalgia marketing with the 50th anniversary of the franchise. - TFA was another huge financial success and TROS will likely cross $750m in the next month since it’s already over $500m. Everyone loves to point the finger at Kathleen Kennedy or Rian Johnson or JJ or a billion other boogeymen for every little stumble in the franchise, but the real culprit is and always has been Bob Iger and his insistence on turning Star Wars into a yearly occurrence instead of waiting and making it a special event. He was also the biggest proponent of the Solo movie. That’s what happens when you have an idiot businessman making creative decisions. I mean I’ve as tired of JJ and his “I have to be Spielberg 2.0” shtick as everyone else, but c’mon. Nine times out of ten, the fault lies with the studios and the idiots who run them.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
I still say that the reason Solo failed is because they put it out in May rather than December. It was too soon after TLJ and Infinity War (another Disney movie) was still in theatres and doing well. It was still not a good movie, but it would have done fine in the usual Star Wars slot when it would have had no competition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Kinda wrong on both counts. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:What exactly about the Trek "political landscape" do you want further developed? TNG didn't bring a lot to the table as far as astropolitics goes; the Klingon Empire is rotten at the top with corruption, the Cardassian war gets retconned in as this supposedly traumatic conflict, and the Romulans are running around trying to stir poo poo up. The latter two are pretty much just plot devices to drive the actual stories the writer wanted to tell. Mostly it's just interactions with alien societies that aren't just condescending from the infinitely superior Federation, with the implication that the things that happen will have consequences, rather than just having one episode and scooting away never to be seen again, and much like how the Klingons got much more depth from being added to over time, it's much easier to put together a political landscape when you have big pieces already in place rather than making everything from scratch. It's harder when telling a prequel story when you're penned in by having a pre-written endstate, and it's even harder when the main characters are totally detached from any larger entity that could have further implications. The first episode with the Cardassians was an very bold writing decision, since it not only gave a regular character a personal past with the Cardassians, but it established this big huge power next to the Federation that actually won a war against the Federation somehow, and from that starting point a much bigger story was written. The Romulans may have spent 40 years glaring across the neutral zone before their planet popped, and it doesn't seem like any writer had any interest in exploring external Ferengi politics, but that doesn't invalidate the premise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:What exactly about the Trek "political landscape" do you want further developed? TNG didn't bring a lot to the table as far as astropolitics goes; the Klingon Empire is rotten at the top with corruption, the Cardassian war gets retconned in as this supposedly traumatic conflict, and the Romulans are running around trying to stir poo poo up. The latter two are pretty much just plot devices to drive the actual stories the writer wanted to tell. A few things come to mind: 1) First and foremost the Federation is pretty much the dominant galactic super power in the galaxy. It would be interesting to see the allegory to the United States now. How can you live out your ideals and forestall corruption when you are given that much power. 2) With Martok and Worf in charge of the Klingon Empire would they bring back any reforms to the Klingon Empire. Enterprise pulled on a thread that could be explored about Klingon Scientists and other aspects of Klingon's that are not soaked in the idea of combat is the only way to build a society. 3) How would the Dominion's first defeat in thousands of years impact the Gamma Quadrant? Would there be more open rebellion, could we see other powers in the Gamma Quandrant? 4) How would Voyager's knowledge of the Delta Quadrant its species effect the future as well? There are tons of stories to be told in those 4 points alone! And as people have pointed out in this thread before, Star Trek is suppose to be about looking forward. The fact that Picard is the first Star Trek IP in decades that looks beyond its original series and premise is astounding. For whatever reasons the suits at Paramount think of Star Trek as the 60s TOS series and its holding the franchise back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:... it's much easier to put together a political landscape when you have big pieces already in place rather than making everything from scratch. It's harder when telling a prequel story when you're penned in by having a pre-written endstate, and it's even harder when the main characters are totally detached from any larger entity that could have further implications. I don't buy the "easier to put together a political landscape" argument as a compelling reason for hanging on to decades of shoddy worldbuilding and contradictory plot points. Babylon 5 established a complex multi-polar setting from scratch very efficiently. The Expanse did a decent job of it too. I'm not interested in prequels either. At this point I'm firmly in the "start over in a totally* new timeline" camp. And even then I don't think Star Trek is a great format for telling big astropolitical sagas, in part because I don't think Star Trek needs to be everything. *i.e. none of the cop-out Spock Prime "oh it's the same characters, for realsies!" temporal bullshit
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 01:25
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Stop taking that literally. Marvel is a template on how you build a large cinematic universe. No one is saying literally copy and paste star trek characters into the same bombastic action heavy movies. Agreed. For those who are afraid if they try to do multiple shared ST movies and TV shows across a cohesive universe it will become some lovely billion dollar action franchise concerned more with international box office, would you rather it just continue as it has the past 20 years? Random false starts, shows with 20 showrunners that have constant tonal shifts, multiple reboots and a continuing descent in quality? What I want, is something like we had in the 90s. I want 2-3 Star Trek shows on tv at the same time. If they can sustain the quality, I'd take more. But I'd like them to be TNG and DS9 tier. I'd like the shows to tell complex arcing stories. I'd like there to be periodic movies, maybe not every year but sooner than 4-5 years apart. The movies could be there for the big cinematic plots and events, all while tying into the shows. Using something like the MCU model would be a better step to this than what they've been doing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Taking notes and mailing the suggestion "do like the marvel movies" to CBS in hopes they just take the dang advice. Bet they wish they'd thought of it themselves, but I'm putting a million dollar invoice in there too for having to give them the idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 03:25
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:
You're right, but I guess what I really meant was how he set up stuff that was hard to make sequels to. ST09 and SW:TFA are both really good movies on their own, IMO. But he also did ST:ID which seemed to tank a lot of the goodwill. And by all accounts he had no plan for how to resolve any of the stuff he set up in TFA.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 04:51
|
|
|
Sir Lemming posted:You're right, but I guess what I really meant was how he set up stuff that was hard to make sequels to. ST09 and SW:TFA are both really good movies on their own, IMO. But he also did ST:ID which seemed to tank a lot of the goodwill. And by all accounts he had no plan for how to resolve any of the stuff he set up in TFA. You can always count on two things in JJ projects: daddy issues and Mystery Boxes that often have completely unplanned resolutions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 04:59
|
|
|
To be honest i would trade not having another Trek movie for having a decent quality TV show
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
Don't forget a bunch of weird artificial lens effects that make everything seem overly shiny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
So, did everything Star Trek get yanked from Amazon Prime at midnight EST? Or are my devices messed up?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 06:12
|
|
|
Yep, it's all gone. Hopefully it's just a temporary lapse in contracts, but they're probably moving everything to All Access.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 06:52
|
|
|
Maybe, but in that case it seems a little odd since Prime will get all the movies next month.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:The first episode with the Cardassians was an very bold writing decision, since it not only gave a regular character a personal past with the Cardassians, but it established this big huge power next to the Federation that actually won a war against the Federation somehow, and from that starting point a much bigger story was written. The Romulans may have spent 40 years glaring across the neutral zone before their planet popped, and it doesn't seem like any writer had any interest in exploring external Ferengi politics, but that doesn't invalidate the premise. Well, I mean, the Cardassians didn't win that first war with the Federation, it's just that the Federation is (SUPPOSED TO BE) a government that actually *gets* that War is Hell and genuinely doesn't want it, so the first opportunity they got to make a peace treaty, they took it. Which left the Cardassian Empire way more intact and still-a-functional-threat-to-some-degree than a war with, say, the Klingons or Romulans would have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 08:12
|
|
|
Yeah, it seems like the Cardassians were the initial aggressors over disputed border territories, the Federation pushed them back out and held them there during ongoing skirmishes until they gave up and accepted Federation peace offers, but the Federation never had to fully transition into taking it seriously as a war rather than a border conflict on a civilisational level. If the Cardassians had won they probably wouldn't have stopped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 09:24
|
|
|
Yeah, I never got the impression they were supposed to be a legitimate threat to the Federation, just that they were able to present enough of a hassle that the Federation would prefer to settle. I've stated a few times why I think it's clear they're Soviet standins (not the least of which being that they're the sneaky drinky godless Union), so sort of a Cold War situation (sans nukes) at the very best. Also, unlike the Klingon and the Romulans, I don't think they're ever shown at any time to have a technology superior to the Federation analogue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 11:14
|
|
|
unintelligible electronic grating The Breen Confederacy wishes to hear more of this "cold" war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:Yep, it's all gone. Hopefully it's just a temporary lapse in contracts, but they're probably moving everything to All Access.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 14:42
|
|
|
My fellow non-vulcan being, have you heard of the temporal cold war?! I've been rewatching Enterprise and I now think it is significantly worse than Voyager. Most of the episodes just end up being dull rather than flat out bad, culminating in that horrible S3 ending (seriously, just like why, why would you go back to TEMPORAL COLD WAR). Also, Archer has the worst written/directed/emoted speeches I've ever seen in a series, half the time he just starts going on a rant about his grandpa. At least the andorian episodes were pretty good, and the automated repair station was interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I wish I had known that, because my wife and I had been watching TNG and Netflix doesn’t have the HD remaster Looking at Netflix, they say the episodes are HD.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
Falcorum posted:Also, Archer has the worst written/directed/emoted speeches I've ever seen in a series, half the time he just starts going on a rant about his grandpa. Archer feels like someone was worried that people would start asking "Why haven't we heard about this guy in the series set after this?" and decided the answer should be "Oh, because he was really boring and kinda an awful person, so nobody in the 24th century talks about him."
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 14:52
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I wish I had known that, because my wife and I had been watching TNG and Netflix doesn’t have the HD remaster Yes they do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 14:55
|
|
|
Pick posted:Yeah, I never got the impression they were supposed to be a legitimate threat to the Federation, just that they were able to present enough of a hassle that the Federation would prefer to settle. I've stated a few times why I think it's clear they're Soviet standins (not the least of which being that they're the sneaky drinky godless Union), so sort of a Cold War situation (sans nukes) at the very best. Also, unlike the Klingon and the Romulans, I don't think they're ever shown at any time to have a technology superior to the Federation analogue. I feel DS9 leans into that with the Cardassians having basically little dog syndrome on the galactic scale ('There are no minor planets in the Cardassian Union!') which leads into them allying with the Dominion, the other diverse galactic superpower that functions as a mirror to the Federation. They're fascists, and their ideology makes them pretty much incapable of playing nice with others for a long enough time, resulting in total disaster when they piss off someone they can't afford to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
I would imagine Netflix's days of having Star Trek are numbered though, as CBS All Access being the only route to see the show besides buying blu-rays would be a huge boost to subscriber numbers. Once again, the whole "cord cutting" thing turns out to be a bullshit flash in the pan era because in a few years we'll have to pay more than we ever paid for cable to watch the 20-30 different gated streaming services that will segment all the content. It's funny how different it is to music, where you pay  a month for one service like Google Play, Amazon, Pandora, etc and have access to pretty much every song and album by every artist. Imagine if you had to pay 10 different record labels $10 a month so you could get just their artists? This is what we're headed to, and I don't see it stopping unless a bubble bursts and there's consolidation. 10 years ago you could pay $70-$100 a month for cable and internet and get a ton of stations and have a DVR and record off of 100 different networks. Now you have to still pay $40 or more a month for internet, plus the costs of different services. Another problem with this trend is that it was bad enough when Cool New Show X was only on one streaming service, but at least the larger ones like Netflix and Amazon had back catalogs of tv shows produced by other networks. You might have to wait til the new season comes out for last season to drop, but it was a good way for people to be exposed to stuff. Like I started watching The Good Place on Netflix. If I had ever had to pay for NBC streaming because that show was only available there, I never would have got into it. But soon I bet each service will only have it's own original owned content and jealously guard it's back catalog. poo poo sucks yo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
The Balkanization of streaming content is the worst poo poo CBS AA may also change at some point as that Viacom/CBS remerger is underway and I would imagine that the new company will want to put the Paramount library online
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Astroman posted:
It emphatically does not. There are no contracts. It's easy to switch off subs at any time (so only subscribe to something when you want to watch something on that service). You can opt out of commercials. There are no annoying on screen graphics, compressed credits, sped up episodes, syndication edits. You don't need special equipment to watch. You can watch wherever you want. The audio and video quality is about 500x what it is on cable. I spent a whopping $10 this year to watch Star Trek Discovery, No Activity, Twilight Zone, and Strange Angel. $10 doesn't even cover your ESPN portion of a cable subscription for a single month. However, if you don't own Star Trek by now and you are in this thread, what the gently caress are you doing? The series box sets regularly go on sale for $30-$60 a pop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 15:41
|
|
|
Pick posted:Also, unlike the Klingon and the Romulans, I don't think they're ever shown at any time to have a technology superior to the Federation analogue. Hey, let's not forget that Voyager episode, where Dreadnought was apparently a Cardassian missile so advanced that a Federation star ship couldn't even scratch it's shields! Wonder where all those missiles were during the Dominion war...
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:15
|
|
|
Bucswabe posted:Hey, let's not forget that Voyager episode, where Dreadnought was apparently a Cardassian missile so advanced that a Federation star ship couldn't even scratch it's shields! It cost so much they could only make one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
Bucswabe posted:Hey, let's not forget that Voyager episode, where Dreadnought was apparently a Cardassian missile so advanced that a Federation star ship couldn't even scratch it's shields! It also had Quantum Torpedoes, despite the Cardassians in the Alpha Quadrant not having those. They must've lost the plans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Really though the Cardassians are absolutely the type to have ruinously expensive one-off wunderwaften sent off to random corners of the universe on a gul's drunken whims.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I wish I had known that, because my wife and I had been watching TNG and Netflix doesn’t have the HD remaster I feel like there must be a typo here, but TNG on Netflix is absolutely 100% the HD version. We've been watching it for the past year or so. I think TOS has only the version with the added CGI, but I have those on Blu-ray so I haven't bothered to check.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
To create a high definition TNG, they actually repurposed pixels from deep space nine, which is why ds9 looks like it was filmed by a bearded man with a wooden fin de siecle contraption powered by lamp oil
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
The technical jump between the end of Voyager to Enterprise still astounds me. In spring 2001 they were still editing on VHS, and then just a few months later they made the switch to non-linear editing software and HD. It looks like they were filmed a decade apart.Pick posted:To create a high definition TNG, they actually repurposed pixels from deep space nine, which is why ds9 looks like it was filmed by a bearded man with a wooden fin de siecle contraption powered by lamp oil Lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Bucswabe posted:Hey, let's not forget that Voyager episode, where Dreadnought was apparently a Cardassian missile so advanced that a Federation star ship couldn't even scratch it's shields! As much as I think the Cardassian supermissile was silly, I could easily see it being a matter of "come on, we sent this thing against a Maquis colony and it didn't even make it?? no, gently caress it, this project is done, just like your career. guards! take him away."
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
Lol if you pay for star trek media, pirate everything you don't owe those fuckers a drat thing
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
Streaming services are basically mimicking the pattern of the development of cable (often using the exact same throughput lines), after the actual cable companies hosed up hard enough to make most people want to quit. This time, the government has long been taught to keep at a distance from regulating the internet (or at least, to remain totally uninformed so that it will be impotent and ineffective and never challenge big companies), so there's no equivalents to public-access and it's winner take all with barely any restrictions to tactics that companies can use on eachother. Theoretically competition forces innovation and pushes companies to provide cheaper services, but it also can suck being caught in the middle when unregulated competition gets too fierce. MikeJF posted:Yeah, it seems like the Cardassians were the initial aggressors over disputed border territories, the Federation pushed them back out and held them there during ongoing skirmishes until they gave up and accepted Federation peace offers, but the Federation never had to fully transition into taking it seriously as a war rather than a border conflict on a civilisational level. If the Cardassians had won they probably wouldn't have stopped. They "pushed them back" to a border that went further than it did before, and ceded a bunch of Federation worlds with millions of people living on them. Generally the side that loses territory is considered the loser. You can argue that the federation doesn't value its outlying territories, or that they value peace much more than victory, but having to uproot a bunch of Federation citizens (or rescind citizenship from them) is not a victory. After the first few episodes when they were strongly made out to be a serious threat, later writers would have them constantly losing, much like the Borg, but that doesn't change the results of the initial war. Arguably, the peace they sacrificed their territory for wasn't even secure, since the very end of the episode, it's implied that the Cardassians were readying for another war, although the Klingons, Dominion, Maquis, and that crazy captain derailed their plans. You could maybe read the Federation offering protection to Bajor as an aggressive move to limit Cardassian influence, but they still valued the peace enough to do some of the work of controlling Cardassian territory for them by hunting down former federation citizens, which I still don't fully understand.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Hypothetically the federation also thinks that giving them those planets might be effective appeasement, as the Cardassians claim to be (and do seem to be) resource-driven. (Unlike the Klingon they don't seem to be motivated by honor/glory.) I'm not saying it's a good plan but there's a potential rationale.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
HD DAD posted:The technical jump between the end of Voyager to Enterprise still astounds me. In spring 2001 they were still editing on VHS, and then just a few months later they made the switch to non-linear editing software and HD. It looks like they were filmed a decade apart. Enterprise was really ahead of it's time in that way. Shows were just starting to transition to widescreen. The full transition to ATSC wouldn't be complete until 4 years after enterprise was cancelled. UPN didn't even start broadcasting Enterprise in HD until the final 2 seasons. They were also an early adopter of shooting on digital. The first 3 seasons were shot on 35mm film, but season 4 went to shooting with digital HD cameras. It must have been a transition internally at Paramount Television because other contemporary shows made by them seem to have the same transition to HD at the time. It's entirely possible Voyager would have transitioned to that production workflow before it ended if the sets were widescreen safe and had enough detail for HD. bull3964 fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Dec 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2019 18:47
|
|