And sure, Gene wanted to make money. I'm not sure he would have been quite as 'multi-platform' as TFA Marketing... I mean, TFA oranges, cheese straws and yogurts? That's a bit much in my book...
Sugar Smacks cereal with Spock on the box - I seem to recall that you could collect the box tops and send them in for a toy phaser. There was a brief fad in the '70s for calorically-dense, nutritional chocolate bars (they were called "space food"), and there was a Trek-themed one. T-shirts galore (no, they're not at all hard to find, even today - a friend of mine in college had a red shirt with a bullseye on it and the words, "Starfleet Security"), bicycles, models, toys, action figures after those came into vogue (so after TMP came out), Halloween costumes, pendants, rings, earrings, quite a bit from the ThinkGeek.com catalog... trust me, Star Trek has never forgotten marketing, not even (perhaps especially not) as far back as Roddenberry.
And of course some fans are up in arms about the new movies. Some fans hated TNG, too. Some never forgave DS9 for quite possibly ripping off the Babylon 5 proposal pitch. Some Trekkies become mired in their preferred interpretation, and can't stand anything different. Welcome to the fandom - been like this since the cartoon came out and some fans hated it.
I never knew that All the other things, sure, but I didn't know they'd done Star Trek foodstuffs too.
This is the thing I've never really experienced... While there are certainly some Trek movies I liked less than others, and some I disliked, I've never really hated anything put out prior to the JJTrek. I won't lie, I didn't enjoy Enterprise, but I never really hated it... I definitely saw the similarities between it and DS-9, but even finding out about the ripping off of the pitch, it's still my favorite Star Trek series... But the amount of complaints I see about JJTrek, the most interesting thing I notice, is that people are all complaining about the same things, rather than each complaining about something different...
I just watched Star Trek and Into Darkness back to back, and while they were entertaining and passed the time, the issues I've previously raised about them still bothered me...
Into the Derpiness, was nothing more than a Wrath of Khan knockoff.
Yup. But here's the most damning review of it... I watched them because I didn't have anything better to do, and I knew it would kill time...
Watching the two movies, however, did allow three points to strike me.
- Following his mind-meld with Spock, Kirk asked about his father, which Spock then explained. This, and other comments Kirk made, utterly destroys the upthread-mentioned headcanon notion that the mind-meld in some way allowed Kirk to experience the greatness of his Prime-self, and to see a better person to aspire to become (his behaviour towards women at the beginning of Into Darkness also shows that his outlook had not changed, and his conduct is still unbecoming an officer and a gentleman...)
- A potential plot point which was utterly missed, would been to have had another officer other than Chekov take over as Scotty's replacement. The flaw, is that while Chekov had been shadowing Scott, that in no way qualifies him to immediately assume the duties of chief engineer, so that, once again, highlights the lack of consideration which the writers give to an organisation of rank. Had another officer been made chief engineer instead, that could have at least allowed for more exploration of the saboteur who forced the ship out of warp. For all we know, that still could have been Chekov (unlikely, but not impossible to discount) The thread of investigating the sabotage, would have at least given the plot something else interesting.
- Misuse of talent by the director... The officer who took over Chekov's post, I don't recall being identified by name, rank, or even having a spoken line (At least the bald Mandroid (wifey's favorite character) got to speak, even if he did respond to Kirk's order for a specific report on the damage of the hull, with an unhelpful and useless 'Hull damage'.) I'm rather confused as to why the other officer who the camera kept focussing on (and who actually did have a spoken line) the lady with the white hair, was not chosen to sit beside Sulu instead... I'm sure wardrobe could have given her a gold uniform instead of a red one, and she was on the set just as much as the other lady...
1) Maybe but I imagine that if he just downloaded a lifetime's worth of memories he wouldn't be able to process it all... hence the question.
2) I didn't see it as a missed opportunity but an excuse to use the supporting cast more. In the TOS films if you aren't Kirk, Spock or Bones you are criminally underused...So yeah there should have been an Assistant Chief Engineer, who may have been the little alien that walked with Scotty, so you are right but it's an excuse to give Chekov something more to do.
3) Not sure how this is a problem with the film.
1) Processing I could accept. Equally, he could have said: "My father saw me take command of the Enterprise?!" Given his behaviour at the beginning of Into Darkness hadn't changed, as highlighted by everything Pike said to him in the disciplinary, I still don't see that he had seen anything to inspire him. He only grew in Into Darkness, as a result of what happened to him during those events.
2) I'd have to disagree slightly, as Chekov was actually quite a featured character in the movies. Never a lead, I admit, but certainly one of the main characters... My point was not so much of giving Chekov something to do, but as an opportunity for the sabotage to have been more thoroughly looked into as an additional plot thread.
3) I'm just talking a technical behind the scenes 'might have been better' thought, rather than a true flaw, such as the cold fusion device. A bit like if someone receives a meal, and says "Needs more salt..." The camera clearly gave shots to the white-haired lady, and she did have (a) spoken line... I'm just saying it would have made as much sense to have sat her next to Sulu, especially as given she had a published line, she probably gets a better royalty than the other actress... In for a penny, in for a pound, as the saying goes...
1) Probably.
2) I don't agree with this. Chekov gets his hand burned in TMP, he gets more time in WOK due to him being brain slugged by Khan, I don't recall his part of the plan in Search for Spock, he had a bigger role in Voyage Home, I don't recall what he did in FF, and was pretty much Spock's sounding board when they were looking for clues.
3) I am all in favor of more white haired lady. I am crushing on her and even made one of my AR crew BOFFS similar to her.
1) I know that Picard offered Spock the opportunity to experience what he and Sarek had shared, but I think that in this instance, there's more evidence against Kirk 'seeing his betterself' and trying to change. An interesting notion, I just don't think there's really anything in the films to support it in any way...
2) For sure, none of those were major parts, but they were at least parts... By getting his hand burned in TMP, that gave the opportunity for Ilia's Deltan voodoo powers to be shown. Depending in which edit of the film you see, but in one, she clearly says she can help him, and 'takes away his pain' with a laying of hands... And indeed, thanks to his accident in Voyage Home, some old dear wound up with a regenerated kidney thanks to McCoy's then-needed presence in the hospital I just think that another officer as Scotty's replacement could have allowed a bit more ambiguity, a bit more of the cloak and dagger shenanigans Section 31 likes to pull, and a bit more of a conundrum, than Khan's open-confession, and then legitimate turn against Kirk, when he ordered Scotty to put him down...
3) Glad to hear As mentioned, because she had a spoken line, she'd get more royalties than the other actress, and she was present at exactly the same time, so it wouldn't've cost them any more, or required her for extra days, had she been sat next to Sulu (I suspect JJ just has a fetish for shaved heads... (Captain Robau, Nero and co, Chekov's replacement, the unmasked Klingon, the Mandroid, other notably hair-less aliens...) It just seems like it was under-using the actress, given that there were all those 'stolen shots' of her... Rather than 'sneaking shots', I'd've had her front-row
1) Actually didn't they say that some part of Sarek stayed with Picard. So maybe AR Kirk isn't seeing his life through Shatner's eyes but rather through Nimoy's eyes.
2) Probably...who knows what's on the cutting room floor of STID.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I was talking about the TOS movies...which took place during the 80's and 90's.
It's unfair to compare a film's character development to a tv show's. A tv show has more than 2 hours to focus on each character.
I don't think the other characters were underutilized in the films. The show is about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy - one of the reasons the new movies are so atrocious is they decided to throw out that dynamic. I understand the frustrations of the actors who weren't in the star trio - but it makes about as much sense as me complaining I wasn't in Star Trek enough. They weren't in the show's core trio because they weren't in the show's core trio - I'm not in Star Trek enough because I'm not one of the cast.
They don't throw out the dynamic of Spock, Kirk and McCoy...they just give the others more to do
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
They don't throw out the dynamic of Spock, Kirk and McCoy...they just give the others more to do
Really? Cause I remember Spock trying to choke Kirk in the first one - Kirk mocking Spock in both the first and second. McCoy occasionally showing up and saying nothing of any importance for comedic purposes. And Uhura spending 90% of her onscreen time utterly shocked that her Vulcan boyfriend doesn't show his emotions much and nagging him about it.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing,
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
CBS should bleed him for whatever they can considering the absolute lack of respect he had for the source material.
And next time... sell the rights to Mutant Enemy.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
And sure, Gene wanted to make money. I'm not sure he would have been quite as 'multi-platform' as TFA Marketing... I mean, TFA oranges, cheese straws and yogurts? That's a bit much in my book...
Sugar Smacks cereal with Spock on the box - I seem to recall that you could collect the box tops and send them in for a toy phaser. There was a brief fad in the '70s for calorically-dense, nutritional chocolate bars (they were called "space food"), and there was a Trek-themed one. T-shirts galore (no, they're not at all hard to find, even today - a friend of mine in college had a red shirt with a bullseye on it and the words, "Starfleet Security"), bicycles, models, toys, action figures after those came into vogue (so after TMP came out), Halloween costumes, pendants, rings, earrings, quite a bit from the ThinkGeek.com catalog... trust me, Star Trek has never forgotten marketing, not even (perhaps especially not) as far back as Roddenberry.
And of course some fans are up in arms about the new movies. Some fans hated TNG, too. Some never forgave DS9 for quite possibly ripping off the Babylon 5 proposal pitch. Some Trekkies become mired in their preferred interpretation, and can't stand anything different. Welcome to the fandom - been like this since the cartoon came out and some fans hated it.
I never knew that All the other things, sure, but I didn't know they'd done Star Trek foodstuffs too.
This is the thing I've never really experienced... While there are certainly some Trek movies I liked less than others, and some I disliked, I've never really hated anything put out prior to the JJTrek. I won't lie, I didn't enjoy Enterprise, but I never really hated it... I definitely saw the similarities between it and DS-9, but even finding out about the ripping off of the pitch, it's still my favorite Star Trek series... But the amount of complaints I see about JJTrek, the most interesting thing I notice, is that people are all complaining about the same things, rather than each complaining about something different...
I just watched Star Trek and Into Darkness back to back, and while they were entertaining and passed the time, the issues I've previously raised about them still bothered me...
Into the Derpiness, was nothing more than a Wrath of Khan knockoff.
Yup. But here's the most damning review of it... I watched them because I didn't have anything better to do, and I knew it would kill time...
Watching the two movies, however, did allow three points to strike me.
- Following his mind-meld with Spock, Kirk asked about his father, which Spock then explained. This, and other comments Kirk made, utterly destroys the upthread-mentioned headcanon notion that the mind-meld in some way allowed Kirk to experience the greatness of his Prime-self, and to see a better person to aspire to become (his behaviour towards women at the beginning of Into Darkness also shows that his outlook had not changed, and his conduct is still unbecoming an officer and a gentleman...)
- A potential plot point which was utterly missed, would been to have had another officer other than Chekov take over as Scotty's replacement. The flaw, is that while Chekov had been shadowing Scott, that in no way qualifies him to immediately assume the duties of chief engineer, so that, once again, highlights the lack of consideration which the writers give to an organisation of rank. Had another officer been made chief engineer instead, that could have at least allowed for more exploration of the saboteur who forced the ship out of warp. For all we know, that still could have been Chekov (unlikely, but not impossible to discount) The thread of investigating the sabotage, would have at least given the plot something else interesting.
- Misuse of talent by the director... The officer who took over Chekov's post, I don't recall being identified by name, rank, or even having a spoken line (At least the bald Mandroid (wifey's favorite character) got to speak, even if he did respond to Kirk's order for a specific report on the damage of the hull, with an unhelpful and useless 'Hull damage'.) I'm rather confused as to why the other officer who the camera kept focussing on (and who actually did have a spoken line) the lady with the white hair, was not chosen to sit beside Sulu instead... I'm sure wardrobe could have given her a gold uniform instead of a red one, and she was on the set just as much as the other lady...
1) Maybe but I imagine that if he just downloaded a lifetime's worth of memories he wouldn't be able to process it all... hence the question.
2) I didn't see it as a missed opportunity but an excuse to use the supporting cast more. In the TOS films if you aren't Kirk, Spock or Bones you are criminally underused...So yeah there should have been an Assistant Chief Engineer, who may have been the little alien that walked with Scotty, so you are right but it's an excuse to give Chekov something more to do.
3) Not sure how this is a problem with the film.
1) Processing I could accept. Equally, he could have said: "My father saw me take command of the Enterprise?!" Given his behaviour at the beginning of Into Darkness hadn't changed, as highlighted by everything Pike said to him in the disciplinary, I still don't see that he had seen anything to inspire him. He only grew in Into Darkness, as a result of what happened to him during those events.
2) I'd have to disagree slightly, as Chekov was actually quite a featured character in the movies. Never a lead, I admit, but certainly one of the main characters... My point was not so much of giving Chekov something to do, but as an opportunity for the sabotage to have been more thoroughly looked into as an additional plot thread.
3) I'm just talking a technical behind the scenes 'might have been better' thought, rather than a true flaw, such as the cold fusion device. A bit like if someone receives a meal, and says "Needs more salt..." The camera clearly gave shots to the white-haired lady, and she did have (a) spoken line... I'm just saying it would have made as much sense to have sat her next to Sulu, especially as given she had a published line, she probably gets a better royalty than the other actress... In for a penny, in for a pound, as the saying goes...
1) Probably.
2) I don't agree with this. Chekov gets his hand burned in TMP, he gets more time in WOK due to him being brain slugged by Khan, I don't recall his part of the plan in Search for Spock, he had a bigger role in Voyage Home, I don't recall what he did in FF, and was pretty much Spock's sounding board when they were looking for clues.
3) I am all in favor of more white haired lady. I am crushing on her and even made one of my AR crew BOFFS similar to her.
1) I know that Picard offered Spock the opportunity to experience what he and Sarek had shared, but I think that in this instance, there's more evidence against Kirk 'seeing his betterself' and trying to change. An interesting notion, I just don't think there's really anything in the films to support it in any way...
2) For sure, none of those were major parts, but they were at least parts... By getting his hand burned in TMP, that gave the opportunity for Ilia's Deltan voodoo powers to be shown. Depending in which edit of the film you see, but in one, she clearly says she can help him, and 'takes away his pain' with a laying of hands... And indeed, thanks to his accident in Voyage Home, some old dear wound up with a regenerated kidney thanks to McCoy's then-needed presence in the hospital I just think that another officer as Scotty's replacement could have allowed a bit more ambiguity, a bit more of the cloak and dagger shenanigans Section 31 likes to pull, and a bit more of a conundrum, than Khan's open-confession, and then legitimate turn against Kirk, when he ordered Scotty to put him down...
3) Glad to hear As mentioned, because she had a spoken line, she'd get more royalties than the other actress, and she was present at exactly the same time, so it wouldn't've cost them any more, or required her for extra days, had she been sat next to Sulu (I suspect JJ just has a fetish for shaved heads... (Captain Robau, Nero and co, Chekov's replacement, the unmasked Klingon, the Mandroid, other notably hair-less aliens...) It just seems like it was under-using the actress, given that there were all those 'stolen shots' of her... Rather than 'sneaking shots', I'd've had her front-row
1) Actually didn't they say that some part of Sarek stayed with Picard. So maybe AR Kirk isn't seeing his life through Shatner's eyes but rather through Nimoy's eyes.
2) Probably...who knows what's on the cutting room floor of STID.
1) Yes, the did say that, at the very least, Picard retained an 'afterimage' of Sarek following their mind-meld. I can't recall if Spock ever performed a mind-meld on Kirk, but when Sarek did so in Search for Spock, he did say that it easn't there (although he was admitedly looking for Spock's active katra, rather than a post-meld afterimage) And yes, if the theory held, then Kirk would have at least seen Spock's memories of his other-self. But as I mentioned, his questions to Spock after, his behaviour and lack of knowledge of subsequent events such as Khan's identity, all shows him proceding exactly as before the meld took place, and with none of the suggested 'seen the light, trying to turn over a new leaf' as a result of the meld. He only grew after Pike slapped him down, made him confront the error of his ways, but then offered the hand up so he could continue to learn under Pike's guidance.
2) With JJ, anything's possible... (although I doubt it included a new engineer or sabateur )
3) I didn't know that at all, thank you for the link I knew that Jodi Johnston was primarily a model at the time rather than an actress, but I didn't realize that Aisha Hinds had more work under her belt, or that Ms Johnston was portraying a previously seen character
Along that line, I'd just like to take a moment to give props to Neil McDonough for his portrayal of Lieutenant Hawk... He gave 100% commitment to every shot he was in. Even if he wasn't speaking, he was paying attention to what was going on arround him, interracting with the others, or just doing something to show he was part of the team, but never crossed the line into scene-stealing... One of my favorite performances of not just First Contact, but of almost any movie I've seen...
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
CBS should bleed him for whatever they can considering the absolute lack of respect he had for the source material.
And next time... sell the rights to Mutant Enemy.
CBS can't bleed him for a thing...since he was working under the permission of Paramount
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
While he'll have a great deal to say about marketing...it's actually Disney that slapped TFA on oranges and cans of soup. I can't speak for anyone else but I would go out and buy a box of Scotty-Os brand cereal or a can of Mr Spock's Italian Wedding Soup.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
While he'll have a great deal to say about marketing...it's actually Disney that slapped TFA on oranges and cans of soup. I can't speak for anyone else but I would go out and buy a box of Scotty-Os brand cereal or a can of Mr Spock's Italian Wedding Soup.
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
While he'll have a great deal to say about marketing...it's actually Disney that slapped TFA on oranges and cans of soup. I can't speak for anyone else but I would go out and buy a box of Scotty-Os brand cereal or a can of Mr Spock's Italian Wedding Soup.
JJ slips the blame again
I don't see TFA marketing as bad. They made back the budget of this film on Force Friday. As a Star Wars fan I love that I can see Star Wars stuff no matter where I go. I wish that for Star Trek. I wish I could go out and see a Star Trek billboard and many people wearing Star Trek TV shirts and laughing at the absurdity of Star Trek oranges. I wish I could go into any store and buy something Star Trek related.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
While he'll have a great deal to say about marketing...it's actually Disney that slapped TFA on oranges and cans of soup. I can't speak for anyone else but I would go out and buy a box of Scotty-Os brand cereal or a can of Mr Spock's Italian Wedding Soup.
JJ slips the blame again
I don't see TFA marketing as bad. They made back the budget of this film on Force Friday. As a Star Wars fan I love that I can see Star Wars stuff no matter where I go. I wish that for Star Trek. I wish I could go out and see a Star Trek billboard and many people wearing Star Trek TV shirts and laughing at the absurdity of Star Trek oranges. I wish I could go into any store and buy something Star Trek related.
I guess I'm just not a fan of mass commercialism, and marketing for the sake of it... For example, had there been a shower scene in TFA where Finn and his buddies are using Darth Vader soap-on-a-rope, or a particular can of deoderant, then fair enough, release a product for it as well. When it's literally just slapping a brand and likeness on something to fleece extra $$s out of the rubes er, I mean, fans, that's when I feel it's just greed (and while that is what big businesses exist to do, it's not something I agree with)
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing,
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Actually, with Star Trek, it's a little more complicated as to "who owns what" marketing wise. For example Filmation claimed a lot of the concepts they used in the animated series were theirs and not Paramounts and if Paramount used or referred to any of them, they owed Filmation a fee (This is the reason for Paramount saying "The animated series in non-canon" when TNG series production started because they wanted to avoid and possible legal hassles if a script referred to something from TAS.)t is true that Bad Robot also wanted CBS and Paramount to pull all existing DVDs of TOS, TNG, DS9, ENT, (including stuff even Paramount still received fees from) et. al. off the market - and BOTH CBS AND Paramount were not willing to go that far - but again, even with what bad Robot wanted to market, the rights were not all owned by Paramount/CBS.
With Star Wars, it's more simple because after the original versions of the first film (which BTW 20th century Fox still owns a part of) - George Lucas bought ALL rights to the successive films (including the remastered version of the original Star Wars film, which was the main reason he was pushing it as the de facto version of Star Wars, and not willing to do anything with re-releasing or cleaning up the original 1977 Star Wars and that would have meant part of the profits going to Fox and his ex-wife; and Academy Award winning editor who was responsible for the final edit of the 1977 Star Wars film - which did in fact help make the film the success it was. (There's the first 20 or so minutes of the original George Lucas edited film, which I'm sure if the rest of the film had been edited in that way, would have made Star Wars a little known B sci fi film of the 1970ies.)
And of course now Disney owns EVERYTHING 'Star Wars' (with the exception or the original version of the 1077 film which 20th Century Fox still has a portion of the rights to.)
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Here is a Star Trek The Next Generation shower curtain that just got unveiled today
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Here is a Star Trek The Next Generation shower curtain that just got unveiled today
In the words of Zefram Cochrane... "Sweet Jesus..." >_<
it's funny because I read your comment about Star Trek shower gels and clicked over to Facebook and the official Star Trek page was hawking this
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Here is a Star Trek The Next Generation shower curtain that just got unveiled today
In the words of Zefram Cochrane... "Sweet Jesus..." >_<
it's funny because I read your comment about Star Trek shower gels and clicked over to Facebook and the official Star Trek page was hawking this
Yeah, it's pretty funny when you look at it... Like I said, I'm just not a fan of that kind of 'lets brand anything' merch, at least, not when it's not something which appeared in a/the show/film. As markhawkman said before, Gene came up with the IDIC in the hopes of hawking them, but it did at least appear in the show... Star Trek Continues, had to have the material for the bed sheets specifically recreated. I know they probably aren't allowed to sell them, but that (screen accurate bedding) is something I wouldn't object to and would possibly buy myself... Or say the sky-blue tumble-not mugs which were seen in the early seasons of DS-9 (The only ones I was ever able to get hold of, were ones with the Federation Seal slapped on them (and others had pictures of the Enterprise-D, or Klingon trefoil) ) or the Cardassian matresses and pillows, that would all be fine. But when it's just a case of slapping a brand on something, like a yoghurt or pack of oranges, that's when I feel it's just money gouging rather than merchandising in the spirit of the franchise...
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
That does shed some light on some of the confusion I had regarding the merch. I have to wonder if some Disney merch licenser forgot to mention the characters existed when handing out licenses.
Dont insult DiNozzo like that... sure he can be a goof and immature but he knows when to STFU and be Agent DiNozzo. JJKirk still has issues with that line.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
That does shed some light on some of the confusion I had regarding the merch. I have to wonder if some Disney merch licenser forgot to mention the characters existed when handing out licenses.
I think Monopoly's official line was because it's a mystery that she's the force user in the movie they werent allowed to use her with the lightsaber
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
That does shed some light on some of the confusion I had regarding the merch. I have to wonder if some Disney merch licenser forgot to mention the characters existed when handing out licenses.
I think Monopoly's official line was because it's a mystery that she's the force user in the movie they werent allowed to use her with the lightsaber
Yeah, but why leave her out entirely? I kinda get not showing her with a lightsaber, it's the total exclusion that is weird.
Also, Leia and Phasma.... they're both significant characters, and apparently also left out of some of the stuff. for more data you could look it up on boardgamegeek.
It had as minis, Luke, Vader, Kylo, and Finn. Which is odd because Monopoly usually has more than 4 player tokens. 6 or 8 is normal.
It's not the first time or franchise this has happened to...same thing occurred with Avengers. Not sure that their producers publicly called the merchandising team out on it the way Abrams did (though I would be pleasantly surprised if they did).
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
You mean Olaf was finally going where no snowman had gone before?
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Now lets apply this to Star Trek. Star Trek 2009 is the second highest-grossing in the United States and Canada from the entire Star Trek film franchise, eclipsing The Voyage Home and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Its opening weekend numbers alone outgross the entire individual runs of The Undiscovered Country, The Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis. It also won an academy award for make up....making it the only Star Trek film to win an Oscar.
Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise.
So tell me...what incentive does Paramount have in moving away from what they are doing...which is highly profitable? Is a remake of Star Trek: The Motionless Picture going to put butts in seats? A movie made for just the Star Trek fans is going to fail. When Marvel makes their movies they don't make them just for the guys and gals who go to the comic book shop on Wednesdays...they make them for everyone.
As I've said before, the take is not the correct gauge to be applying. All it means, is that a lot of people paid to go and watch the movies. People have to pay to go and see the movie... They can't go in, watch for free and then pay on leaving if they only enjoyed it. So the take is not a reasonable nor realistic gauge for the quality of the film nor how many of those viewers actually enjoyed it...
Admittedly, there wasn't any internet when Search For Spock or the Voyage Home were released, so the nature of the discussion about them was different, and is different today. Of all the original movies, Search for Spock is my favorite. It has pretty much everything I like in a movie. Voyage Home, less so, but it still had some parts I enjoyed. I've never seen those films being discussed with the same level of division, and utter hatred, as the JJTrek (For the record, I've watched Into Darkness at least a dozen times, so I can't go so far as to say I hate it but I certainly hate JJ...) Look at how slated Beyond's trailer has been... How will that actually do when it is released though?
When viewed from that perspective, what the movies took in the cinema becomes pretty irrelevant if those same people didn't actually all like it... If you were to compare (being generous) 70% of Into Darkness' take to the other films, how would it place then? Did it get that much simply because it is better than the other movies, or because there's more money to spend nowadays and a larger viewing audience? When The Motion(less) Picture came out, there were only the fans who watched the original series. By the time Final Frontier came out, you're easily talking about their children, and possibly even grandchildren, and so on... More people with an interest in a franchise means more bums on seats when the movie hits the big screen.
My take on it wasn't to determine if the reboot movies are/were good or if they were popular. I was stating that from Paramount's point of view they have no incentive to stop this universe and go back to the prime one. Paramount as a studio only has one real indicator for continuing this universe and that's Box Office. It's the same thing with Transformers. Everyone and their brother says they hate those films...and yet the last one did 1.1 billion at the box office. Do you think that anyone at Paramount is saying "Hey let's drop Michael Bay and make these films more like the source material?" Hell no...which is why Bay is always like "Im done with these films" and Paramount buys him an island with prostitutes and cocaine to get him to come back.
Now for the discussions about the other movies...I've brought this point up again and again. The Next Generation was hated by Trekkers as a whole. It wasn't until Best of Both Worlds that Trekkers as a whole came around. If you watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" The writers mention that was when the hate mail stopped. I bring the up because a lot of people have selective memories. We'd like to believe that we loved TNG since "Encounter at Farpoint"...and for some people this may be true...but a vast majority of Trekkers look at the past with rose colored visors. How anyone can not say Final Frontier is the worst Star Trek movie ever is beyond me? That movie is an affront to Trek more than anything Abrams and company did.
I see what you're saying Incentive to go back to the Primeverse would hopefully come from the minions they have on forums like this and elsewhere on the net who would see those less than positive reviews. For example, as I've said before, when JJ was asked if CBS were going to do another Star Trek series, he said they weren't interested. CBS now clearly are interested to do a new Star Trek series, but with Kurtzman, not JJ. I find it strange that when the CBS execs changed their minds/decided to do a new Star Trek series, they didn't go back to the guy who had suggested it (JJ) They clearly don't view him through rose-tinted glasses, so I'd take that as a sign that they can gauge the public opinion, rather than simply sticking with the goose who lays the golden egg Bay-style
Not to be contrary, but genuinely curious, but why do you feel that about Final Frontier? There's a lot I don't like about it (all the camping stuff, that old chestnut of the Enteprise being the only ship to handle it, Kirk, etc) but it has elements which I did like, such as Sybok... As above, I can ignore much of that and consider it an okay movie. Undiscovered Country, on the other hand, I really dislike (General Chang, Azetbur, Valeris(despite being a huge fan of Kim Cattrall) Spock's blatant grooming of a junior officer to the extent that it blinds him to her manipulations, and then his forcing a mind-meld on her) and I'd rate that as an inferior film to Final Frontier...
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing, It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
Oh that I knew, I just hadn't previously considered the lengths of marketing to which JJ might potentially have gone (ie bath products and branded foods...) until seeing the flood of TFA merch
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
That's true... A while back I saw pics shown of a Frozen 'women's toy', but I think that was supposed to be knock-off merch, not an official product...
You mean Olaf was finally going where no snowman had gone before?
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
I'd seen the article a while back, and likewise, every article I read about Lucas makes me respect him even less, and JJ more. Equally, before that article was released, it was very easy to see the amount of TFA Crazy Merch available, think "Didn't JJ want to make sure his was the only Star Trek merch available...?" and fear that had he gotten his way, there would have been Kirk and Spock deoderant sets... I also read an article fairly recently where he admitted that the writing of Into Darkness was essentially a case of him allowing the other writers to write their own scenes, and then putting them together, rather than them all working on the whole as a team...
Here is a Star Trek The Next Generation shower curtain that just got unveiled today
I'd of got one if it were the Classic Enterprise.
<chuckle>
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Regarding merchandising I can tell you for sure that things do NOT all go to JJ for approval and he only finds out after the fact if there is an issue. In fact, he actually got really irked at Hasbro when they released a Star Wars Monopoly game recently that acted like all of the female characters--including TFA main protagonist Rey--didn't exist, and apparently called them up after they had already released the thing to express his annoyance.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
That does shed some light on some of the confusion I had regarding the merch. I have to wonder if some Disney merch licenser forgot to mention the characters existed when handing out licenses.
Apparently, Hasbro was under the perception that Rey was supposed to be kept under wraps till the movie hit and since they released the Star Wars Monopoly game before hand, they were erring on the cautious side so as not to lose the license.
It's flimsy, but understandable.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Comments
1) Actually didn't they say that some part of Sarek stayed with Picard. So maybe AR Kirk isn't seeing his life through Shatner's eyes but rather through Nimoy's eyes.
2) Probably...who knows what's on the cutting room floor of STID.
3) LT Zahra..http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Zahra
It looks like the replacement was chosen because she has way more acting credits than Jodi Johnston...who was appearing in her first film at the time.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Aisha_Hinds
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
They don't throw out the dynamic of Spock, Kirk and McCoy...they just give the others more to do
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Really? Cause I remember Spock trying to choke Kirk in the first one - Kirk mocking Spock in both the first and second. McCoy occasionally showing up and saying nothing of any importance for comedic purposes. And Uhura spending 90% of her onscreen time utterly shocked that her Vulcan boyfriend doesn't show his emotions much and nagging him about it.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
You guys are mixing stuff up...
Paramount was very much in favor of letting JJ have his way with the Star Trek movie licensing,
It was CBS that put the kibosh on everything because they refused to pull all the TOS licenses that were out there...
Which is what JJ wanted to do so that only his Trek movie material was available.
At that point JJ decided that he didn't want to be involved with the split of the IP between Paramount and CBS.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
CBS should bleed him for whatever they can considering the absolute lack of respect he had for the source material.
And next time... sell the rights to Mutant Enemy.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
1) Yes, the did say that, at the very least, Picard retained an 'afterimage' of Sarek following their mind-meld. I can't recall if Spock ever performed a mind-meld on Kirk, but when Sarek did so in Search for Spock, he did say that it easn't there (although he was admitedly looking for Spock's active katra, rather than a post-meld afterimage) And yes, if the theory held, then Kirk would have at least seen Spock's memories of his other-self. But as I mentioned, his questions to Spock after, his behaviour and lack of knowledge of subsequent events such as Khan's identity, all shows him proceding exactly as before the meld took place, and with none of the suggested 'seen the light, trying to turn over a new leaf' as a result of the meld. He only grew after Pike slapped him down, made him confront the error of his ways, but then offered the hand up so he could continue to learn under Pike's guidance.
2) With JJ, anything's possible... (although I doubt it included a new engineer or sabateur
3) I didn't know that at all, thank you for the link
Along that line, I'd just like to take a moment to give props to Neil McDonough for his portrayal of Lieutenant Hawk... He gave 100% commitment to every shot he was in. Even if he wasn't speaking, he was paying attention to what was going on arround him, interracting with the others, or just doing something to show he was part of the team, but never crossed the line into scene-stealing... One of my favorite performances of not just First Contact, but of almost any movie I've seen...
To be fair he was making a Disney film and they will slap a label on anything
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
CBS can't bleed him for a thing...since he was working under the permission of Paramount
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
While he'll have a great deal to say about marketing...it's actually Disney that slapped TFA on oranges and cans of soup. I can't speak for anyone else but I would go out and buy a box of Scotty-Os brand cereal or a can of Mr Spock's Italian Wedding Soup.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I don't see TFA marketing as bad. They made back the budget of this film on Force Friday. As a Star Wars fan I love that I can see Star Wars stuff no matter where I go. I wish that for Star Trek. I wish I could go out and see a Star Trek billboard and many people wearing Star Trek TV shirts and laughing at the absurdity of Star Trek oranges. I wish I could go into any store and buy something Star Trek related.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Every time I read an article about Lucas I lose respect for him. Every time I read an article about Abrams I gain respect. Even though I didn't like every creative choice Abrams made in the Trek movies (but liked some), I have never seen any reason to slag the guy off personally and it really gets old to see that all the time.
Article where JJ and the merchandising people butted heads:
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/01/09/jj-abrams-star-wars-force-awakens-rey-toys
Purists are free to go have a good cry now.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Actually, with Star Trek, it's a little more complicated as to "who owns what" marketing wise. For example Filmation claimed a lot of the concepts they used in the animated series were theirs and not Paramounts and if Paramount used or referred to any of them, they owed Filmation a fee (This is the reason for Paramount saying "The animated series in non-canon" when TNG series production started because they wanted to avoid and possible legal hassles if a script referred to something from TAS.)t is true that Bad Robot also wanted CBS and Paramount to pull all existing DVDs of TOS, TNG, DS9, ENT, (including stuff even Paramount still received fees from) et. al. off the market - and BOTH CBS AND Paramount were not willing to go that far - but again, even with what bad Robot wanted to market, the rights were not all owned by Paramount/CBS.
With Star Wars, it's more simple because after the original versions of the first film (which BTW 20th century Fox still owns a part of) - George Lucas bought ALL rights to the successive films (including the remastered version of the original Star Wars film, which was the main reason he was pushing it as the de facto version of Star Wars, and not willing to do anything with re-releasing or cleaning up the original 1977 Star Wars and that would have meant part of the profits going to Fox and his ex-wife; and Academy Award winning editor who was responsible for the final edit of the 1977 Star Wars film - which did in fact help make the film the success it was. (There's the first 20 or so minutes of the original George Lucas edited film, which I'm sure if the rest of the film had been edited in that way, would have made Star Wars a little known B sci fi film of the 1970ies.)
And of course now Disney owns EVERYTHING 'Star Wars' (with the exception or the original version of the 1077 film which 20th Century Fox still has a portion of the rights to.)
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Here is a Star Trek The Next Generation shower curtain that just got unveiled today
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
In the words of Zefram Cochrane... "Sweet Jesus..." >_<
it's funny because I read your comment about Star Trek shower gels and clicked over to Facebook and the official Star Trek page was hawking this
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
My character Tsin'xing
Dont insult DiNozzo like that... sure he can be a goof and immature but he knows when to STFU and be Agent DiNozzo. JJKirk still has issues with that line.
Anyone heard anything new about the lawsuit?
I think Monopoly's official line was because it's a mystery that she's the force user in the movie they werent allowed to use her with the lightsaber
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Also, Leia and Phasma.... they're both significant characters, and apparently also left out of some of the stuff. for more data you could look it up on boardgamegeek.
It had as minis, Luke, Vader, Kylo, and Finn. Which is odd because Monopoly usually has more than 4 player tokens. 6 or 8 is normal.
oooh... pretty:
My character Tsin'xing
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
I'd of got one if it were the Classic Enterprise.
<chuckle>
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Apparently, Hasbro was under the perception that Rey was supposed to be kept under wraps till the movie hit and since they released the Star Wars Monopoly game before hand, they were erring on the cautious side so as not to lose the license.
It's flimsy, but understandable.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion