The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > If you care about star trek you should read this
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-14-2008, 02:36 PM
deg3D's Avatar
deg3D deg3D is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
The problem is market dilution. You don't sell scuba gear to desert rats, and you don't sell Trek to jocks.
No, you sell it to hopefully everyone.

You seem to have it in reverse IMO. You seem to be operating under the perception or vain assumption that Trek is Trek because of the Trekkies. And that only Trekkies should be considered when making Trek. No. Trekkies are Trekkies because of Trek.

When Trek was first made, there was not even any such thing as a Trekkie to even consider. It was produced as an entertainment property aimed at garnering as many ad points as it could get, with every type of demo in mind, just like any other TV show. It was aiming at the Western watching huge cross-over demo (biggest at the time). Nothing has changed in that respect, overall. Except in the Trekkies "we own Star Trek now" mind and perception.

And Trek, while it keeps Trekkies in mind, it is not interested in attempting to tailor-make Trek to perfectly suit a small percentage of hard-core fanatic fans. If they did, Trek would be over and done with, as there are just not that many hard-core fans to support it. Trek needs the non-Trekkie viewer more than it needs the Trekkies. But Trekkies can't even, or are not even able, to consider that fact, because it takes them out of their special comfort zone, and/or self-appointed self-perceived Trek elitist state of being. Fact of the matter is, Trek is aimed at the world-wide market of all types of folks, jocks and deserts-rats included, just like every other TV show or film, the more who like it the better = more money to be made.

And BTW, I know enough jocks who like Trek too. And plenty of other types one would never think would like Trek. Trek is only solely Trekkies' Trek in the Trekkies' mind.

I'm not a costume-wearing Trekkie, although my home is filled with Trek stuff, but I have no prob with those that get that kind of fun out of it. But when Trekkies start climbing up on their self-appointed Trek high-horse, and treating non-Trekkie fans like Trek plebeians, IMO they just show themselves to have no grasp of what Trek is really all about: IDIC.

That's one reason I call myself a Trekker, not a Trekkie. As too often (and I'm not saying your are, or all Trekkies are), but way too often I meet "Trekkies" that have no clue what Trek is really all about. And quite frankly, I think that type of Trekkie does nothing but tarnish the Star Trek name by implied or inferred association. They think they talk the talk (but too often end up of all things fighting about Trek, oxymoron anyone...), but have no clue how to walk the IDIC walk.

But hey, I would be a complete hypocrite if I didn't say; to each their own eh. Whatever floats one's boat. However, I think it's very important to understand, that one's boat is not by any means the only boat or type out sailing on the Trek ocean.

Again, just me thoughts... AVAV/IDIC.

deg
__________________
VFX artist/lead modeler/creature/hardware
Universal Studios
Defiance

http://deg3D.biz

Last edited by deg3D : 09-14-2008 at 02:46 PM. Reason: Typo-demons...
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-14-2008, 04:08 PM
The Stars The Stars is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deg3D View Post
No, you sell it to hopefully everyone.

You seem to have it in reverse IMO. You seem to be operating under the perception or vain assumption that Trek is Trek because of the Trekkies. And that only Trekkies should be considered when making Trek. No. Trekkies are Trekkies because of Trek.

When Trek was first made, there was not even any such thing as a Trekkie to even consider. It was produced as an entertainment property aimed at garnering as many ad points as it could get, with every type of demo in mind, just like any other TV show. It was aiming at the Western watching huge cross-over demo (biggest at the time). Nothing has changed in that respect, overall. Except in the Trekkies "we own Star Trek now" mind and perception.

And Trek, while it keeps Trekkies in mind, it is not interested in attempting to tailor-make Trek to perfectly suit a small percentage of hard-core fanatic fans. If they did, Trek would be over and done with, as there are just not that many hard-core fans to support it. Trek needs the non-Trekkie viewer more than it needs the Trekkies. But Trekkies can't even, or are not even able, to consider that fact, because it takes them out of their special comfort zone, and/or self-appointed self-perceived Trek elitist state of being. Fact of the matter is, Trek is aimed at the world-wide market of all types of folks, jocks and deserts-rats included, just like every other TV show or film, the more who like it the better = more money to be made.

And BTW, I know enough jocks who like Trek too. And plenty of other types one would never think would like Trek. Trek is only solely Trekkies' Trek in the Trekkies' mind.

I'm not a costume-wearing Trekkie, although my home is filled with Trek stuff, but I have no prob with those that get that kind of fun out of it. But when Trekkies start climbing up on their self-appointed Trek high-horse, and treating non-Trekkie fans like Trek plebeians, IMO they just show themselves to have no grasp of what Trek is really all about: IDIC.

That's one reason I call myself a Trekker, not a Trekkie. As too often (and I'm not saying your are, or all Trekkies are), but way too often I meet "Trekkies" that have no clue what Trek is really all about. And quite frankly, I think that type of Trekkie does nothing but tarnish the Star Trek name by implied or inferred association. They think they talk the talk (but too often end up of all things fighting about Trek, oxymoron anyone...), but have no clue how to walk the IDIC walk.

But hey, I would be a complete hypocrite if I didn't say; to each their own eh. Whatever floats one's boat. However, I think it's very important to understand, that one's boat is not by any means the only boat or type out sailing on the Trek ocean.

Again, just me thoughts... AVAV/IDIC.

deg

That was well said.


Btw im 15 and a simi-pro surfer not what people think of when they think star trek fan
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-14-2008, 04:10 PM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

(By the way I am also fifteen but use proper English.)


Sorry. Your post is indecipherable.
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-14-2008, 04:20 PM
tannerwaterbury's Avatar
tannerwaterbury tannerwaterbury is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 456
Default

OK if this board is gonna have arguments too, you can argue at the startrek.com boards, not here. I left those boards BECAUSE of the arguing and bickering, so TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE!
__________________
ALL PRAISE TO ZARDOZ!

GREAT SCOTT!!! ANOTHER FRIEND OF ZARDOZ!

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-14-2008, 05:15 PM
deg3D's Avatar
deg3D deg3D is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stars View Post
That was well said.


Btw im 15 and a simi-pro surfer not what people think of when they think star trek fan
Cool dude, I'm a surfer too, whenever I can. And I caught your meaning, no prob. Hang loose bud.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tannerwaterbury View Post
OK if this board is gonna have arguments too, you can argue at the startrek.com boards, not here. I left those boards BECAUSE of the arguing and bickering, so TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE!
For the record tannerwaterbury (and I hear ya and agree 100%), if that comment was directed at me at all, I'm not arguing and/or bickering, far from it. Quite the contrary actually. All just Trek-Talk to me eh. I can easily accept and respect any and all views, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. MOF, I very much enjoy hearing other's POV, even if they are the opposite of my own (spice o' life baby!) and do not attempt to proselytize my own views with the opinion that they are "right" for any and all, other than my own self. To each their own I say.

As always, I merely share my own views, with the assumption that I would be granted the same respectful lee-way to do so. Take what one likes, leave the rest I say eh.

In and of themselves, AVAV (all views are valid) to me eh.

deg
__________________
VFX artist/lead modeler/creature/hardware
Universal Studios
Defiance

http://deg3D.biz

Last edited by deg3D : 09-14-2008 at 06:11 PM. Reason: Typo-demons...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-14-2008, 05:55 PM
Digginonrand's Avatar
Digginonrand Digginonrand is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 257
Default

Remember, Batman and James Bond started over again. Just a thought I posted on another thread. Heck, you never know.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-14-2008, 06:09 PM
deg3D's Avatar
deg3D deg3D is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 258
Default

Yep and again I say over here, Oh yeah, I forgot about Batman. Talk about going to total crap (IMO) and then coming back even better than ever before. Just goes to show you what real talent can do.

deg
__________________
VFX artist/lead modeler/creature/hardware
Universal Studios
Defiance

http://deg3D.biz
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-14-2008, 07:43 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,574
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Digginonrand View Post
Remember, Batman and James Bond started over again. Just a thought I posted on another thread. Heck, you never know.
Hate to burst your bubble (okay, don't hate it too much or I wouldn't do it, would I? lol) but in both cases, Casino Royale and Batman Begins, the writers involved made a deliberate effort to go back to the respective franchises' roots because they recognized that it was a long drift away from those roots that had weakened and/or nearly killed the franchises in question. Granted, Bob Kane never envisioned Bruce Wayne being trained by ninja. Ian Fleming's Casino Royale didn't feature cell phones. There's the sticking point where we confused Star Trek in the mix. Star Trek should be modernized like Batman and James Bond!

No... it should be futuristic. But guess what? It always has been. A cell phone that can call someone in orbit, without cell towers? We still can't do that. A handheld directed energy weapon that can vaporize its target? Sounds pretty futuristic to me. Sounds like they know things we don't. Maybe they know why tactile control panels are better than touchscreens (easier to enter input into without having to look, perhaps?) or why those buttons should be thick (so their fragile electronic internal components are better shielded?) and have rounded edges (so your clothing/skin won't snare on them in the case of boarding and combat?)

Naaaaaaah... after all, it's 2008 -- we already know everything.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-14-2008, 07:55 PM
deg3D's Avatar
deg3D deg3D is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
Hate to burst your bubble (okay, don't hate it too much or I wouldn't do it, would I? lol) but in both cases, Casino Royale and Batman Begins, the writers involved made a deliberate effort to go back to the respective franchises' roots because they recognized that it was a long drift away from those roots that had weakened and/or nearly killed the franchises in question. Granted, Bob Kane never envisioned Bruce Wayne being trained by ninja. Ian Fleming's Casino Royale didn't feature cell phones. There's the sticking point where we confused Star Trek in the mix. Star Trek should be modernized like Batman and James Bond!

No... it should be futuristic. But guess what? It always has been. A cell phone that can call someone in orbit, without cell towers? We still can't do that. A handheld directed energy weapon that can vaporize its target? Sounds pretty futuristic to me. Sounds like they know things we don't. Maybe they know why tactile control panels are better than touchscreens (easier to enter input into without having to look, perhaps?) or why those buttons should be thick (so their fragile electronic internal components are better shielded?) and have rounded edges (so your clothing/skin won't snare on them in the case of boarding and combat?)

Naaaaaaah... after all, it's 2008 -- we already know everything.
Agree with you all there too dude. Great points, all-around IMO eh.

deg
__________________
VFX artist/lead modeler/creature/hardware
Universal Studios
Defiance

http://deg3D.biz
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-14-2008, 08:21 PM
vuedoc's Avatar
vuedoc vuedoc is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deg3D View Post
Agree with you all there too dude. Great points, all-around IMO eh.

deg

I don't think anyone on this board has ever said anything that is blatantly wrong, because there is no wrong. We offer our opinions and then discuss them (hopefully) intelligently and maturely. That being said, the final product in May will continue to generate opinions but as Saint astutely notes, there should be no right or wrong because this is all really conjecture about the future.

Regarding the original thread question: I am going to realistically predict an outcome between 2. and 3., just because I am more optimistic and I do agree with a lot of Deg's points about marketing.

And I have nothing to say about Shatner in this thread (shame on the rest of you)!
__________________
"Stop it? I'm counting on it."
"But not because you threaten me. I'll pay you because... it's my pleasure."
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 02:25 AM.


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.