The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > General Star Trek Discussions > Sequel is not about villain
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:12 PM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
To attract intelligent people, you don't actually have to have a 'smart' movie in your pocket. That's the ugly truth about the movies.
Yes, the effort for a stupid movie is a lot lower.

A stupid movie also reaches intelligent people.
But with a 'smart' movie you might lose all those people, who just want to be entertained in their free time, escape the harsh reality for two hours without needing to think too much.

That is quite an unfair world we are living in.
Stupidity is rewarded, quality punished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin
While certainly the BEST of Trek is on TV there's also plenty of TV Trek that's way worse than the films (on balance) as well. This also includes the stupidity factor as well, which is perfectly present on TV Trek along the way.
Of course.
A TV show has the advantage that in 170 episodes you can make a lot of experiments. If one episode is too stupid or too smart, the next episode can be totally different again.
Therefore you have the chance to satisfy all people, those who like comedy get a comedy-episode, those who like action get an action episode, those who like moral dilemma get an moral-episode, those who like drama/science/horror/researching...

A TV show gives you the possibility to be creative, because you aren't trapped in a "all or nothing"-situation.
In a movie however you only can have one single story that has to reach a specific min. box-office.
__________________
And if tyrants take me, And throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free, Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble, The structure will tumble, And free men will cry:
Thoughts are free!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:14 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Exactly - as such there's no point pretending that making the smartest or most intellectual series of films ever is actually key to the process.

TOS didn't work strictly on one level and neither should the films.
Of course TOS wasn't one-dimensional but there are aspects of the show which weren't essential, e.g the Western element. Roddenberry had to put it in because The Cage was too intellectual in the studio's opinion, they wanted more action and as Westerns were popular in the 60s this was the natural way to go.
When TOS hit the big screen this ingredient didn't survive. Same could be said about a counsellor in TNG. It was a typical 80s thing (and that's why Troi changed a bit in later TNG, VOY and the TNG movies) but nothing quintessential TNG.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:19 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTrekkie View Post
Yes, the effort for a stupid movie is a lot lower.

A stupid movie also reaches intelligent people.
But with a 'smart' movie you might lose all those people, who just want to be entertained in their free time, escape the harsh reality for two hours without needing to think too much.

That is quite an unfair world we are living in.
Stupidity is rewarded, quality punished.
Welcome to the West.

Of course, it also depends on whether you can find uniformity of opinion on a Trek film in terms of 'stupid' or 'smart' entries in the franchise actually are.

Opinions will always vary.

Quote:
Of course.
A TV show has the advantage that in 170 episodes you can make a lot of experiments. If one episode is too stupid or too smart, the next episode can be totally different again.
Therefore you have the chance to satisfy all people, those who like comedy get a comedy-episode, those who like action get an action episode, those who like moral dilemma get an moral-episode, those who like drama/science/horror/researching...

A TV show gives you the possibility to be creative, because you aren't in a "all or nothing"-situation. In a movie however you only can have one single story that has to reach a specific min. box-office.
Which is why the movies always struggle to balance out what they want to be, and what the makers (and this applies to all the Trek film makers, not just Abrams) decide to do as well.

The films try to do it ALL in two hours mostly.

Which is why TV shows playing a longer game than two hours can get away with more variety of tone and style.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:23 PM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Then, you have that fact that TV is changing a lot just now and it's harder for shows to succeed even if they are good shows. The days of an (almost) assured seven year run are well and truly gone, so again, to capture an audience a future series is going to have to have something which will draw in and maintain viewers quickly.
Yes, that is quite critical.
Best you already have a full story for the whole season One before you start with the first episode. Otherwise you might not get many seasons.

However there are a lot of good series on the market who get at least four or even more seasons.
Unfortunatelly those mostly are pay-tv-series.
I just think of Dexter which still has a great quality after five seasons. Or the HBO series like The Sopranos used to be.

The Network a Star Trek serie will be broadcasted could have a huge effect on what kind of TV show Star Trek will become.
__________________
And if tyrants take me, And throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free, Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble, The structure will tumble, And free men will cry:
Thoughts are free!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:33 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTrekkie View Post
Yes, the effort for a stupid movie is a lot lower.

A stupid movie also reaches intelligent people.
But with a 'smart' movie you might lose all those people, who just want to be entertained in their free time, escape the harsh reality for two hours without needing to think too much.

That is quite an unfair world we are living in.
Stupidity is rewarded, quality punished.
First Contact is a funny action/horror movie which on the way virtually defines what Trek is. Via Picard's idealism, Lily's scepticism and above all via the everyman Cochrane who helps the audience to connect to these folks from the bright future ... which is actually never seen in the movie so it has an interesting messianic quality. Cochrane doesn't know whether Picard is for real or not and yet he works towards this promised land nonetheless.
Technically it's a causality paradox but I really think that the comparison with messianic religions is more suitable. There you also have paradoxes like the Christian "Jesus died for our sins, yet were aren't free of sin". The prophecy just opens the space of possibilities, in the Christian case for redemption and in Cochran's case for the notion that there could be more to life than booze, bucks and booty.

I'd say that this is an inherently smart and Trekish movie which works superficially as a straightforward blockbuster. There doesn't have to be a contradiction between "good movie" and "blockbuster", if you really want to you can do both at the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:38 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTrekkie View Post
Yes, that is quite critical.
Best you already have a full story for the whole season One before you start with the first episode. Otherwise you might not get many seasons.

However there are a lot of good series on the market who get at least four or even more seasons.
Unfortunatelly those mostly are pay-tv-series.
I just think of Dexter which still has a great quality after five seasons. Or the HBO series like The Sopranos used to be.

The Network a Star Trek serie will be broadcasted could have a huge effect on what kind of TV show Star Trek will become.
True, but then it will likely end up CBS and not on pay-per-view like HBO/Showtime or any of those platforms. Since I doubt CBS would ever give up the rights to make TV Trek - unless a goodly sum of money was involved - then where a future show would be produced seems easy to determine at present.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-18-2010, 03:12 PM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
True, but then it will likely end up CBS and not on pay-per-view like HBO/Showtime or any of those platforms. Since I doubt CBS would ever give up the rights to make TV Trek - unless a goodly sum of money was involved - then where a future show would be produced seems easy to determine at present.
True. And the second question ist, how big Star Trek's advantage will be, if CBS might treat Star Trek a little better than other TV shows, because it is a famous brand, which DVDs still will sell years later, even when the current ratings aren't the very best.
Star Trek probably will get chances other TV shows never get. That's one possibility to also get a little bit more freedom for some innovative ideas.
__________________
And if tyrants take me, And throw me in prison, My thoughts will burst free, Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble, The structure will tumble, And free men will cry:
Thoughts are free!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-18-2010, 04:23 PM
jla1987's Avatar
jla1987 jla1987 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omegaman View Post
Its always about the "villain" or rather the protagonist (in whatever form that takes).

I think there will be a villain in the next sequel, though the primary focus will be on the "team" and the spirit of Trek.

The villain will undoubtedly be Harry Mudd and the trouble he causes. I think we will be in for lots of laughs this time around. Think Star Trek the Voyage Home for a parallel.
I'm not sure if I care for that. It's a little early to be heading in that direction with this cast IMO.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:44 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.