The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Can Star Trek be epic?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: How successful will Star Trek be?
It'll be the smash hit of 2008; win an Oscar 12 25.53%
It'll be the largest ST title to date 34 72.34%
It'll be mildly successful, but won't reach new audience 6 12.77%
Won't manage to break even 2 4.26%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 47. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02-02-2008, 06:29 AM
Beammeup's Avatar
Beammeup Beammeup is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 33
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ktrek View Post
I think that JJ and company will make the best Star Trek film they can make with the script they have to work with. Will it be as big as Star Wars? Never! At least not and stay true to Star Trek. It will do well at the box office though and will probably have a sequel or two and we can only hope...another TV series.

Kevin
Its bigger than Star Wars--how many movies and TV series have they done for Star Trek--SW's does'nt even come close. ST XI will be Spectacular --I can almost sense it.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-02-2008, 07:00 AM
sir num nums sir num nums is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sherwood, AR
Posts: 2,357
Default

I think if written well, and parts 2 and 3 kind of already planed, I think the movie can and will do very well.

The trouble with TNG movies is that they did not pick up where the last movie left off.

ST:II through ST:V did lol, and when ST:V was a let down, they did a great clean up job with ST:VI
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-02-2008, 07:04 AM
Raiden's Avatar
Raiden Raiden is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London, England
Posts: 346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir num nums View Post
I think if written well, and parts 2 and 3 kind of already planed, I think the movie can and will do very well.

The trouble with TNG movies is that they did not pick up where the last movie left off.

ST:II through ST:V did lol, and when ST:V was a let down, they did a great clean up job with ST:VI
That they did and a fine job too.

As far as the TNG movies go, I think that was to get the punters in the seats at the cinema.
__________________
Are You Lookin' at Me?
First Raid'en'tan under the Vorta Eris
Victory is Life !


HardyCofE
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-02-2008, 08:12 AM
TheTrekkie's Avatar
TheTrekkie TheTrekkie is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ktrek View Post
I think that JJ and company will make the best Star Trek film they can make with the script they have to work with. Will it be as big as Star Wars? Never! At least not and stay true to Star Trek. It will do well at the box office though and will probably have a sequel or two and we can only hope...another TV series.

Kevin
What do you think is big?
Only the success? Here SW of course is more meanstream and Star Trek movies won't reach it.
Or also the story? Here STXI of course can become as epic as SW, I often wondered why all the stories were limited on one ship, often even one sector.

Last edited by TheTrekkie : 02-02-2008 at 08:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-02-2008, 08:28 AM
intrepid's Avatar
intrepid intrepid is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 75
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJTrek View Post
This is my first post, but here goes.
I think the biggest challenge for Star Trek will be to present a movie that has the "epic" feel that made Star Wars so successful (I am sorry to admit it). Star Trek has consistantly had great story telling and a human feel in its movies, but has too often fallen short on special effects and audience. I think Nemesis attempted to do this, but obviously fell slightly short, showing how the old method has become a bit long in the tooth. I think JJ and the new crew are doing a great job so far, and will likely give us a good movie. So, can ST do what it needs to to be a modern blockbuster? Can it reach beyond trekkies?

LLAP (live long and prosper)

Interesting take. My view is what you are kind of talking about is pandering, in a way, which is what screwed up the franchise in a lot of ways and why B&B suck so much. They wanted to have it both ways and ended up getting both things wrong. I think Abrams and his 'magic box' theory is one way to go about it differently, not letting us know enough to get disinterested.

Cocherane said- 'i'm doing this for one reason- dolar signs, money' Thats B&B, thats Paramount, thats half the writers. you can watch episodes of any of the series and just look at the episode, the plot and story line and just think, 'man they really just milked this one in' you know? I think Abrams will at least not be milking it in, not doing the least ammount of effort it takes to get paid, which is more than it seemed like what was going on with B&B IMO
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-02-2008, 08:50 AM
Isaac Lawrence
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I voted: "It'll be mildly successful, but won't reach new audience." And I voted this way working on the, "Well, if you have to ask, then you can't afford it." notion.

So yeah, if you have to ask, then it probably won't be that big of a movie. And by "big" I'm talking "Blockbuster, $250+ million domestic gross" big. I don't think it will be that big.

And I hate to be that way because I am a positive person by nature. But after giving it some serious thought, I honestly don't feel the movie will be that big. Sure, it'll be number one and win it's weekend and everything, and probably stay number one for a few weeks. But still, it's Star Trek.

And don't get me started, and I know, "What's in a name?" and all that, but if the title of the movie is indeed "Star Trek XI:... ." Oh, then you can forget it. Trekkies and Trekkers will go and see it, but I don't think very many casual moviegoers will. If it's "Star Trek," then they have a chance. But if it's "Star Trek XI: The Movie" or whatever. No.

Again, I hate being negative, but this is my honest feeling. And I think it will do somewhere in the neighborhood of $150 to $175 million domestic. Which would be huge for Star Trek. But still, that's only huge for Star Trek.

Of course, I could be wrong about all of this, but I don't think I will be.

EDIT: With that said, I'm sure I'll enjoy every minute of the movie. Check that: since it has The Original Series as it's basis, I'm more than sure I'll enjoy every minute of it.

Last edited by Isaac Lawrence : 02-03-2008 at 08:50 AM. Reason: To add one thing and fix a few typos; unlucky 13th post.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-02-2008, 08:57 AM
sir num nums sir num nums is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sherwood, AR
Posts: 2,357
Default

I don't think it will be called Star Trek:XI

I believe the poster says "Star Trek".
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-02-2008, 09:15 AM
TyrantMikey's Avatar
TyrantMikey TyrantMikey is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starfleet Command
Posts: 16
Post Trek, History, and the Future

I've been a Trek fan for a darned long time. I'm 40 years old, and I remember watching it as a little boy, laying on my stomach on the living room floor, chin on my hands, enraptured as Kirk, Spock, McCoy and crew zipped around the galaxy saving the universe from one disaster after another.

I've watched all of the series, and all of the movies, and loved them all. Even the cheesey ones. But I've noticed something.

The Cheese Factor runneth high. And originality runneth low. We're recycling the same stories over and over and over. For almost three whole seasons, Geordie could solve any problem Picard ran into with a tightly focused, modulated tachyon particle beam. It was suddenly the Miracle Particle of the Universe (tm). Didn't like the way something panned out? Travel back in time and change it. Need a new setting? Holodeck!

We forgot that Star Trek isn't about the technology. It's always been about the characters and how humanity rises above its own failings. Roddenberry's vision for Starfleet was that they were the white knights of the galaxy, riding to the rescue. Always the good guys. Somewhere along the way, we lost sight of that.

I'm all for complex story telling; I need complex story telling. I even need complex story telling that involves the technology that makes it science fiction. (So long as it's believable science fiction rooted in science and not fantasy. Hello, Star Wars! I'm looking at you!) But never forget that Trek is about the characters, and the way they interact with each other, and how they overcome the obstacles they face.

Warp engines, communicators, turbolifts, sensor arrays, cloaking devices...those are all props. They are used by the actors to tell the story. They are not the story.

But what I really wanted to say was this: the props from the older movies and series have become dated, and needed a revision. Just look at the iPhone for crying out loud. It makes a tricorder look like an old AM Radio. No vessel from the 23rd Century would rely on knobs and dials--they break too easily, and they'd be blown right off if something exploded or in the event of explosive decompression.

(Ooh! Techspeak.)

Trek NEEDS to be updated. It's sorely dated. But we LOVE the characters from the original series. They're nearest and dearest to most folks' heart. They, and that beautiful gleaming ship are what stole our hearts in the first place. It's the right place to start.

Going back, and telling the story all over again is the right thing to do. But it has to be done right, and with care. You have to respect canon, but you have to be willing to step on a few toes along the way. Some changes are inevitable. You can't make it current without changing some things.

You MUST respect the characters above all.

If they do it right, and new viewers are able to walk out of that theater and talk about it with understanding without ever having seen Trek before, they've succeeded.

That's what I'm hoping for.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-02-2008, 11:12 AM
Captain_of_the_Enterprise's Avatar
Captain_of_the_Enterprise Captain_of_the_Enterprise is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: James Madison University
Posts: 272
Default

1 Spider-Man 3 $336,530,303

2 Shrek the Third $322,719,944

3 Transformers $319,246,193

4 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End $309,420,425

5 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix $292,004,738

6 I Am Legend $252,247,711

7 The Bourne Ultimatum $227,471,070

8 300 $210,614,939

9 National Treasure: Book of Secrets $206,829,041

10 Ratatouille $206,445,654

These are the total grosses for the last year 1-10

If Star Trek truely has a great script which can appeal to BOTH Trekkies and Non-Trekkies then I don't see why it can't crack 200 Million if not come close.

For this to happen though, Abrams cannot rely on internet marketing as he did with Cloverfield. It won't reach the audience he claims they are wanting to get to, I.E. Non-Trekkies.

But, if can hype the movie up without just the use of the internet and make it appeal to newer audiences and espically family/kids then it can reach 200 Million.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-02-2008, 11:15 AM
Isaac Lawrence
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir num nums View Post
I don't think it will be called Star Trek:XI

I believe the poster says "Star Trek".
Yeah, and I see that co-writer and executive producer Roberto Orci had said:
Quote:
...As we've said before, it will simply be Star Trek. We've used the term Star Trek Zero a few times to remind new audiences who have felt that Trek has passed them by that they can tune in and be introduced to the world anew.
So you're right.

Anyway, yeah, I'm just being crabby because I absolutely cannot stand any Trek other than The Original Series. And so I don't want this movie to have anything in any way, shape or form to do with the other TV series or movies (or at least as little as possible). I don't even want the title to reflect or give any kind of indication that there was something other than "Star Trek."

Yes, that's being silly and extreme, but hey... I'm a Trekkie. I'm a Trekkie that loves The Original Series and doesn't have any use for any of the rest of it.

The "Star Trek Zero" term that Roberto Orci said they were using works for me. They could call the movie that and I would be cool with it...

But yeah, you're right, the title will simply be "Star Trek." So I guess I can unclench now, huh.
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 07:30 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.