ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Boycotting Into Darkness does nothing but hurt the future of Star Trek

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 30 2013, 2:32 pm

Quote:

Well, like I said, numbers can always be spun


 


Numbers cannot be spun. I was refering to the analysis OF the numbers. But as I said before, numbers never lie.  1 + 1 is always 2. If you look at the numbers alone, STID is still under performing. No matter what you write about it, the numbers are still the same. 


I prefer Forbes or other financial publications as more neutral sources.  A Star Trek site is not going to give you unbiased commentary.

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this May. 30 2013, 3:40 pm

Numbers themselves maybe cannot be spun, but interpretations of numbers certainly can be (and misinterpreted.)


Comparing it to the highest grossing films of the year so far is one thing. But compared to many other films, and particularly to many Star Trek films, this most recent movie has done quite well. A flop in my view would be a loss for the studio.


Me personally I don't care how it does at the box-office. Enjoyed watching it. Everything else is incidental.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

He'sDeadJim6400

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 113

Report this May. 30 2013, 4:10 pm

ER.. But, my dears, the film is a failure, it failed to meet Paramount expectations, it was #1 for a second then got beat by THE HANGOVER 3, for crying out loud, it continues to drop, maybe this is it, we probably won't see another JJ Abrams Trek movie...no...  


Greatness comes to those who really want to do anything to get it.

bunkey

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 686

Report this May. 30 2013, 4:42 pm

I wouldn't call it a failure, but it's underperforming and not doing what Paramount expected.


There are many interpretations of numbers, but 5 will always be smaller than 8.  If Paramountt set goals and it doesn't meet them, no amount of spin will change that.

rtb2k6

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 73

Report this May. 30 2013, 5:01 pm

All this bitchin about the film just makes youm look like fanatics who dont want change.if JJ hadn't been so radical and shook things up Star Trek would have died a death worse then Nemesis.If a movie dont make money its not gonna get a follow up its that simple.what you should be moaning about is that JJ is now concentrating on Star Wars and Trek can only suffer cause of it.

JoCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 156

Report this May. 30 2013, 6:16 pm

I also went to the Into the Darkness movie and it was extremely good and I am so glad I went. It was fast paced, adventurous, and  being true to Star Trek nature, it told a good story. I am hoping to go to it again if I get the chance. I originally would not go to the new Star Trek movies because I felt the Star Trek franchise and Paramount Pictures had ignored other star trek actors (such as Voyage and Deep Space Nine) who had hopes of going to the big screen which never happened. Out of loyalty to them I wouldn't go the the new Star Trek movie several years ago. And it seems to be disloyal to the orignal seriers. But I finally did watch the Star Trek movie starring Chris Pine and the new new crew and really liked it. I liked it so well that I watched it 3 times in one weekend. There so much in the movie that you don't catch all the inside jokes and one liners phrases that are so funny.Also I now undersand the basic premise of the new Star Trek in that this new crew is living in an alternate reality so that the original star trek series as we know it remains intact. Therefore two realities of star trek are present.They are not trying to rewrite the Star Trek story as we know it (I had wondered about that). And since Ambassador Spook is able to travel into the alternate reality then I think so can some of our other favorite star trek characters whether it be deliberate or they accidentally fall through some sort of time/space portal. It will be interesting to see  what the Star Trek writers think of next. And hats off to the new crew both on set and off.  They are very talented

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this May. 31 2013, 9:07 am

Quote: captain saavik @ May. 30 2013, 11:31 am

>

>Ok it is just plain dumb to not go and see this movie! I was not the biggest fan of the new Star Trek movie of 2009 but I went to see this one anyway because l love a good action flick. But for any self respecting Trekkie not go and see this movie saddens my heart! Into Darkness was a beautifully crafted film whether you like trek or not. We can no longer depend on our original movies to allow trek to continue to the next generation. If one can say they love trek but refuse to support the new influx of movies and other things i'm sorry but I would almost question how much you love this wonderous movement we all Star Trek. Star Wars, Doctor Who, and any other significant series is revamping and I am sure that some of their fans are resisting as well but all this does is harm the series they claim to love so much which inturn harms them.

>Ok I am off my soapbox now please no one take offense to this simply go SEE the movie and then you may critic anything you want so long as you have SEEN the movie. I trully do love you all simply because you love Star Trek, but please don't give up on at least experiencing this new age of Trek.  

>


 


Sorry, Captain Saavik, but I'm with willowtree on this one.  As I said before, I don't blame any fan of prior entries in the franchise for not seeing STID, especially if they saw ST09 and didn't like it.  Why should they waste their hard-earned money and their precious time on something they know they'll most likely not like?  For my part, I'm going to see that movie THIS WEEK, if I can get the babysitting set up for the twins.  I'm sick of waiting!


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this May. 31 2013, 9:34 am

Quote: OtakuJo @ May. 30 2013, 3:40 pm

>

>Numbers themselves maybe cannot be spun, but interpretations of numbers certainly can be (and misinterpreted.)

>Comparing it to the highest grossing films of the year so far is one thing. But compared to many other films, and particularly to many Star Trek films, this most recent movie has done quite well. A flop in my view would be a loss for the studio.

>Me personally I don't care how it does at the box-office. Enjoyed watching it. Everything else is incidental.

>


Otaku Jo is right.  STID box office will keep climbing.  It will make a profit, most likely one large enough to justify a third film.  Apparently, from the Bob Orci interview, Paramount is already trying to line him and the others up for the third film, so that's apparently a done deal. 


WRT the franchise itself, which OtakuJo cited.  Here are the current critical review aggregate scores from rottentomatoes.com:


Ranking                  Title             Date                              Rating   


1                               ST09        2009                       95   Fresh


2                               FC           1996                        92   Fresh


3                              TWOK       1982                        91   Fresh 


4                              STID         2013                        87   Fresh


5                              TVH          1986                        84   Fresh


6                             TUC          1991                        83   Fresh


7                            TSFS          1984                        77   Fresh  


8                            INS            1998                        56   Rotten


9                           GEN           1994                        48   Rotten


10                         TMP            1979                       42   Rotten


11                         NEM            2002                       38   Rotten


12                        TFF             1989                        21   Rotten


So, STID is the 4th highest-reviewed film in the ST film franchise.  That implies that it will get generally good word of mouth and some staying power. 


WRT adjusted WW gross box-office (in 2013 dollars), I got this from box-office mojo:


Rank    Title                                                   Adjusted Gross               Release
1          Star Trek Par.                                     $274,311,200                 5/8/09
2          Star Trek: The Motion Picture               $260,212,000                 12/7/79
3          Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home           $229,227,500                 11/26/86
4          Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan           $213,118,700                 6/4/82
5          Star Trek III: The Search for Spock       $180,708,400                 6/1/84
6          Star Trek: First Contact                        $164,686,600                 11/22/96
7          Star Trek Into Darkness                       $162,193,900                 5/16/13
8          Star Trek: Generations                         $143,280,100                11/18/94
9          Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country $142,092,200                12/6/91
10        Star Trek: Insurrection                          $116,707,600               12/11/98
11        Star Trek V: The Final Frontier               $104,420,100                6/9/89
12        Star Trek: Nemesis                              $58,440,700                  12/13/02
TOTAL:                                                          $2,049,399,000


AVERAGE:                                                       $170,783,200


From the above data, the 3 films in the franchise that are definite failures are INS, FF, and NEM.  I still don't understand how INS got a better rt.com rating than TMP, NEM, and , heck, even GEN.  I'm with V'Ger on this film, I hate it.  It has all the worst excesses of TNG with none of what made that series great.  I really do think it's the worst of the TNG films imo, if not with the fans and the critics.  To me, it's in the gutter with TFF.  Both TFF and INS were big let-downs after the great films they followed, TVH and FC, respectively. Similarly, both films led to a reduction in the budget for their sequels, TUC and NEM.  TUC, was a critical success and made a good profit at the box office.  It probably would've done better if TFF hadn't been so horrible.  Similarly, I though NEM was decent.   It definitely wasn't good, but imo it deserved to do better than it did both critically and wrt box office.  Again, I think NEM was burned by INS as well as the last two series, VOY and ENT.  The fans didn't show up that first weekend (I did though).  They waited for the reviews and the word of mouth.  When that wasn't good, they just waited for the DVD. 


You can see why the TNG series ended after INS (the most expensive ST film to that time with the exception of TMP) and NEM's poor reviews and grosses.  Two duds in a row killed it.  Paramount would've done the same to the TOS films if TWOK had failed, most likely.


 


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this May. 31 2013, 2:52 pm

Quote: rtb2k6 @ May. 30 2013, 5:01 pm

>

>All this bitchin about the film just makes youm look like fanatics who dont want change.

>


Welcome to the Star Trek boards.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

KelisThePoet

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 636

Report this May. 31 2013, 8:56 pm

I don't think anyone should feel obligated to see a movie they don't think they'll like.  I've been a Star Wars fan since I was a kid, but I have no intention of going to the newest crop of Star Wars movies because I don't think I'll like them.


But there's a world of difference between choosing not to see a movie and "boycotting" a movie.  The latter implies a moral protest against an outrage to one's principles.  It implies not just that you're abstaining from something but that you're trying to damage it and pressure it into changing and push others away from it.


Falor was a prosperous merchant who went on a journey to gain greater awareness: Through storms he crossed the Voroth Sea/ To reach the clouded shores of Raal/ Where old T’Para offered truth./ He traveled through the windswept hills/ And crossed the barren Fire Plains/ To find the silent monks of Kir./ Still unfulfilled, he journeyed home/ Told stories of the lessons learned/ And gained true wisdom by the giving. – Falor’s Journey, “Innocence”

wissa

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4031

Report this May. 31 2013, 9:56 pm

I boycotted all the tng movies.  I was pissed they tooka  perfectly good show off the air because they wanted us to pay to see it.  And by boycotting I just mean I waited till they were on video.  It wasn't really a big deal lol


We welcome st.com refugees! click on the image

CmdrShran

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46

Report this Jun. 02 2013, 2:16 pm

I have only one thing to say about STD The Re re Wrath of Khan.....utter CRAP!

So many of you people here have drank the Kool Aid that Jar Jar Abrams and his cronies have provided! This "Star Trek" is devoid of anything that Gene Roddenberry set down as to what Star Trek is all about. I say this as a true old time Trekkie! I have been with Star Trek from the beginning back when TOS aired on NBC, I was one of the many who wrote in to save Star Trek after it was cancelled after its second season. I have been involved in Star Trek fandom ever since then. My last foray into saving Star Trek was when ENTERPRISE was cancelled. Now its gonna be"Deja Vu all over again" because I want to save the REAL STAR TREK. I am sad to see what has become of our beloved franchise, it has been dumbed down and Star Warsed up and in the hands of someone who has admitted that he does not and never has cared for Star Trek or its fanbase. Are all of you Trek fans blind or just desperate for something called Star Trek? Have you NOT noticed how this movie is NOT real Star Trek...dont let the little "winks" at the fans in these films fool you. Orzi and Kurtzman may know Trek but they are not showing that they UNDERSTAND Trek. Star Trek has ALWAYS been about the exploration of the Human Condition and the introspection of what makes us tick. I for the most part have nothing against the cast of the new films...they are talented and can pull this off, the problem is the story or lack thereof. Star Trek inspired people to become scientists,engineers,astronauts because of the vision that Trek gave us. Nu Trek so far has given us none of that inspiration. What we have here is eye candy dressed up as Star Trek and like most candy eventually does is rot your teeth (or in this case your mind). Don't let the Real Star Trek die....let Paramount know your feelings! Now the only place to go for real Star Trek is Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II or the new Star Trek Continues web series, Star Trek Lives there!

Kilrahi

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 405

Report this Jun. 02 2013, 4:48 pm

I find it's future inspiring (so that tick is checked off) and I found the new movie did spend time on the human condition (i.e. why do friends do what friends do?).


Worked for me.  It didn't in 2009.  I feel for everyone who is still on that train, but I'm excited for the next one, and for the blu ray of this one. 

warp speed

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 24

Report this Jun. 02 2013, 5:14 pm

Quote: Kilrahi @ Jun. 02 2013, 4:48 pm

>

>I find it's future inspiring (so that tick is checked off) and I found the new movie did spend time on the human condition (i.e. why do friends do what friends do?).

>Worked for me.  It didn't in 2009.  I feel for everyone who is still on that train, but I'm excited for the next one, and for the blu ray of this one. 

>


Sell, sell, sell. Keep pushing the redo but not everyone is buying it. If it was a great movie no one would have to push it because it would stand on it's own. Special effects or not a cheap copy of the original is still a copy. If they want to sell blu-rays they need to start with an original story instead of a redo.

Tin_Man

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4479

Report this Jun. 02 2013, 6:14 pm

Wow it has been YEARS since I have posted in the boards on this site!


 


Well I got suckered into seeing Star Trek 09 in theatres way back when (against my better judgement), not this time if I see it one way or another I won't be paying to see it.


 


Anyway boycotting this movie is completely OK you should not see a movie just to keep a NAME going. If Star Trek in its current form die's out (which doesn't look like is going to happen with all the $$$ it is bringin in) then fine.


 


Why should anyone pay to see something they are not interested in just to keep a NAME going. If that thing you use to love has turned into something you now dislike, loath, despise hate etc why would you keep supporting it???


 


What are you some sort of abused wife in a bad relationship? If the thing you loved has turned on you don't hang around thinking you are going to change it JUST LEAVE! That's what I did.


 


Throwing more money at a regime you hate i.e. J J and company by paying to see their movies is not going to convince them to bring back the old stuff that wasn't making anywhere near the money the current crap is pulling in BTW.


 


So boycotting a movie franchise you dislike is completely fine!


 


On the bright side for us Prime Star Trek timeline fans:


 


Look at it this way I'm almost sure that at some point down the road some producer is going to convince the powers that be to let him or her pick up the PRIME Star Trek timeline and try and make money with it again. Hell Seth McFarland of Family Guy fame has said he would love to produce a Star Trek series which brings back the writing quality of the early 90's series’.


 


I don't know if he will get the chance (or should) but at some point maybe years from now the Prime Star Trek timeline will probably rise again.


 


 

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: miklamar, darmokattanagra

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum