Star Trek

It's uncanny how wrong one person can be.

These are the figureds for the Trek movies, with domestic grosses adjusted for inflation. As you can see, INS, NEM, and GEN are all near (or AT) the bottom of the pack. Even FC only finds itself near the upper middle.

And, most importantly, if box office gross is really that important to you, looks like JJ ABRAMS movie is the superior.

It seems to go in this order: 09, TMP, TVH TWOK, TSFS, FC, TUC, GEN, INS, TFF, NEM. By my count, that's 3-out-of-4 TNG films in the bottom of the list. FC didn't even crack the top 5 chief.

Sorry.

STVI:TUC wasn't that bad. It had a good idea at its core and was good vehicle for some classic Kirk/McCoy bonding. It was worth watching even just for seeing the marvellous Kim Cattrall as Valeris. She may well be the most interesting - certainly feisty Vulcanian female we ever met. I think there was plenty of mileage in that character. I wonder - did anybody ever run with it in novelisation form - the further adventures of Valeris etc.?

Again, although not a classic - something of a bridging film (as in The Two Towers) - STIII:TSFS had its touching moments. There was a shared joy and purpose I feel between characters and audience, in the decision to go it alone against Star Fleet orders. The scenes between Kirk and Sarek were interesting and the final reunion on Vulcan very emotionally involving - bringing back the tears we shed at the end of STII:TWOK ... and all was right once again in the universe of Trek.

XI did the best cause there was IMAX

Where is your data that supports this statement? How can you prove that it did the best only on the merits of being in IMAX format? IMAX only represented about 10% of opening weekend gross. I'd be greatful if people actually knew what they were talking about before pulling random statements out of their rear ends.

5

I really refraim from judging films by their earnings. It de-values everything about the movie.

That's my two cents energy credits.

A film's box office performance and critical success are the only OBJECTIVE measures we have to judge films by, and the only measures that matter in Hollywood. Otherwise, it's just a matter of individual preferences.

I don't think that is true.  Movies like Wizard of Oz and It's a wonderful life were both box office failures at the time.

Here's a shocker Vger23, I'm going to disagree with you on something. Film is all a matter of individual preference, it just so happens that occasionally many people agree on a film as being "good" or "bad". judging films purely on box office receipts would lead one to believe that the newer Star Wars films were better than the original three, or that Titanic is better than Casablanca. box office is important to Hollywood, because that's how they make their money, and that's all. You and I can disagree about wether 2009 is a good or bad film, civilly or otherwise, because we have different taste, and that's fine and we're both right in our views on 2009. Because film is a subjective art form, open to interpretation, and (hopefully) evoking an emotional response in the viewer. We cheer when the good guys blow up the bad guys and feel sad when our favorite make believe characters die and laugh and all kinds of other emotional responses. So, if I want to like TNG films and someone else doesn't, that fine, but a box office receipt is only going to tell me more people liked it than I did. Not if it was a good film.

I didn't say that box office numbers was the ONLY (or, as you put it exactly..."purely") way to measure a film. I said it was the only OBJECTIVE way to measure it. The only thing that REALLY matters is our own individual opinions. I'm not a phucking idiot, so I don't need the obvious pointed out to me. But, if people want to engage in a DEBATE about what movie is "better" or "worse," other than our opinions, all we have is box office numbers and critical response. It's either that or we go round and round and round in endless circles of "NO IT IZ TEH SUX!!!" vs. "NO WAI ITS WICKED AWESOME!!!"

It's like saying "I don't care that Appalachian State upset Michigan in that game--because the better team didn't win." Ok...that may be your opinion, and that's just fine, but at the end of the day...all that matters is the scoreboard.

Hollywood's scoreboard is box office receipts and critical response.

So, you can argue until you're blue in the face about who the better team is because that's a matter of opinion. But, the score tells the only objective measurable story.