Possibly (the last two Bond films made collosal sums, apparently)
Not really huge at all. Casino Royale made $594m worldwide, and QofS took $586m, both on budgets on $200m. Quite how you can spend $200m on a 1 hr 40 min film (QofS), I'm not sure, but that's what Box Office Mojo says.
I don't doubt a Trek sequel would do better than the first, but, as said, they're probably looking at a $200m budget, from which they would want remarkably better returns. The passing of time won't do the situation any favours either. Paramount will be well aware of how Trek 09 was received by the public, so it's ultimately down to them. If there is no sequel as some suggest, it'll be down to the money rather than Abrams & co not finding the time or whatever.
Exactly what I said earlier. At least someone here agrees with me!
I get the impression that Star Trek is a movie more for people who don't like Star Trek. It's seemed to drag in a lot of support from people who've previously not liked Trek movies which could be for many reasons. It seems so removed from what we expect from a Star Trek movie which in my opinion doesn't stay true to the original format but that might be why so many non Trekies loved it. For a lot of fans that's probably a breath of fresh air but for others it may as well be just another Sci-Fi movie.
Again I apologise for saying it bombed. I didn't like it so read the bad reviews because I wanted to know if it was just me that didn't like it. I found a fair few people who said it was the worst Star Trek movie ever and said it had bombed and obviously I took their word for it before reading all the facts. I now know that it didn't bomb but that doesn't change the fact that I agreed with them. Ok, i'm in a minority but for me it just wasn't the Trek that i'm used to and because of that I didn't like it. I felt the same about the Lost in Space movie. I'm a die hard Lost in Space fan and no matter what, I had to see it but it was so far removed from the spirit, the look and the feel of the original that other than the fact it was a movie about a family called Robinson who got Lost in Space upon the Jupiter II it may as well have been just another Sci-fi movie.
As far as Sci-fi movies go it was alright but for me it wasn't Trek.
1) Simon Pegg (i'm the only person who seems to not 'get' him)
2) The last 20 minutes seemed like a tribute to Leonard Nimoy and lost alittle focus on the storyline
I'm not a star trek fan (but i liked the fim "Trekies" about Star Trek fans) and I thought the film was garbage. To me it just felt like a generic Hollywood sci fi / action film like X Men or Fantastic 4 both of which I thought were great.
1. Star Trek 2009
2. Nemesis
3. Undiscovered Country
4. First Contact
5. Generations
6. Wrath of Khan
7. Insurrection
8. The Voyage Home
9. The Seach for Spock
10. The Motion Picture
11. Final Frontier
1. Wrath of Khan
2. The Voyage Home
3. The Search for Spock
4. Nemesis
5. Undiscovered Country
6. Star Trek 2009
7. Generations
8. First Contact
9. Insurrection
10. The Motion Picture
11. Final Frontier
Wrath of Khan still stands the test of time and Voyage Home is a Trek film that can be enjoyed by anyone (with the possible exception of devoted trekkies:D). I never really understood the hate for Nemesis. It was very accessible for non-trekkies. An interesting story, well-told and a definite set-up from insurrection..
I know First Contact is worshipped by fans but it doesn't offer much for non-trekkies. I remember a trekkie friend listing all the best bits (cameos from the tv series, the james cromwell character saying "engage!") but they would mean nothing to non-fans.
undiscovered country is ok but the crew are too old and that digital clock on the bridge has always annoyed me as it's never consistent. plenty of good moments though.
only the bottom three on my list aren't worth watching imo.
1. Wrath of Khan
2. The Voyage Home
3. The Search for Spock
4. Nemesis
5. Undiscovered Country
6. Star Trek 2009
7. Generations
8. First Contact
9. Insurrection
10. The Motion Picture
11. Final Frontier
Wrath of Khan still stands the test of time and Voyage Home is a Trek film that can be enjoyed by anyone (with the possible exception of devoted trekkies:D). I never really understood the hate for Nemesis. It was very accessible for non-trekkies. An interesting story, well-told and a definite set-up from insurrection..
I know First Contact is worshipped by fans but it doesn't offer much for non-trekkies. I remember a trekkie friend listing all the best bits (cameos from the tv series, the james cromwell character saying "engage!") but they would mean nothing to non-fans.
undiscovered country is ok but the crew are too old and that digital clock on the bridge has always annoyed me as it's never consistent. plenty of good moments though.
only the bottom three on my list aren't worth watching imo.
A men to that. I know its only a small feature on the bridge, but it did stick out. As a recall (my last watch is a while back) Spock says to enter what happened in the log, and gives the time. But he could of just said 'enter it in the log' and it still be the same.
The only other thing I can think of, that wouldnt of bothered me if it was there either way was to to give the feeling like this thing was happening at night time, and its the middle of the night and stuff. On film and TV shows, when things are happening at night, it just gives it a different feel to it.
And with the age thing, your defo right, UC was a good movie to go out with. It was their time. I still feel like I could shed a tear when Kirk gives his final order (that we see on screen anyway) ...and on till morning. A very fitting ending to a super journey that these people have taken.
And with the age thing, your defo right, UC was a good movie to go out with. It was their time. I still feel like I could shed a tear when Kirk gives his final order (that we see on screen anyway) ...and on till morning. A very fitting ending to a super journey that these people have taken.
The worst decision in every respect that Shatner ever made in his career, even worse than singing Rocket Man, was agreeing to appear in Generations. No Shatner, no death of Kirk. Simples.
I'm a long time Trek fan (TNG mainly - loving the current CBS re-runs), but was open minded enough, like a lot of Trekkers, to accept change was necessary to keep the concept alive.
OP - seriously naive to think that Voyager could ever have worked on the big-screen; it sure as hell didn't work on the small screen (the real tipping point for Trek's downward spiral).
Star Trek 2009, once you got the concept of a reboot / parallel universe prequel, ticked the vast majority of boxes for fans and non-fans alike. If you hanker for the cosy, morality based and traditional Trek tales, you're gonna have to seek comfort from the novels / your DVD collection of the old shows. Star Trek 2009 still incorporated the key relationships, particuarly the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and Bones and had sci-fi/drama and action aplenty. If you can't or dont want to see that from the new movie(s), then you're going to be stuck in your own little time capsule.
For the record, my favourites in order are;
Wrath of Khan
Voyage Home
Search for Spock
First Contact
Star Trek 2009
Undiscovered Country
Insurrection
Final Frontier
Generations
Nemesis
The (slow) Motion Picture
1...Generations
2...The Search For Spock
3...First Contact
4.. The Wrath Of Khan
5...Insurrection
6 Nemesis
7..The Undiscovered Country
8...2009 Reboot
9 ...The Voyage Home
10 ...The Final Frontier
11.. The Motion Picture
1. First Contact
2. Undiscovered Country
3. Star Trek (2009)
4. The Voyage Home
5. The Wrath of Khan
6. Generations
7. Insurrection
8. The Final Frontier
9. Nemesis (zzzzzzz)
10. The Motion Picture (zzzz)
1) Simon Pegg (i'm the only person who seems to not 'get' him)
2) The last 20 minutes seemed like a tribute to Leonard Nimoy and lost alittle focus on the storyline
1) Simon Pegg (i'm the only person who seems to not 'get' him)
2) The last 20 minutes seemed like a tribute to Leonard Nimoy and lost alittle focus on the storyline
In genral I like Simon Pegg but he was the wrong choice for Scotty and playing him as some kind of mad scientist/ buffoon was just wrong.
I can't stand Star Trek, any of the TV show or any of the movies.
But as for the 2009 version...I adored.
I saw it because there was nothing else on and it turned out to be one of my favourite films of the year. I really did enjoy every moment of it.
Can't wait for the sequel.
Give the original series on bluray another chance;) Its funny in a way the others weren't, because its so low rent and kirk is so tacky. And you get to see that t&a was a pretty big part of the series from the start, it kind of surprised me that tv back then was more racey than I thought it could be.
I'm a long time Trek fan (TNG mainly - loving the current CBS re-runs), but was open minded enough, like a lot of Trekkers, to accept change was necessary to keep the concept alive.
Don't you mean Trekkies?
As I understand things, Trekkers was a term invented in the late 80's by Star Trek fans to get away from the stigma associated with the phrase Trekkies so they decided to disassociate themselves as being somehow superior or perhaps less nerdy by calling themselves Trekkers. I know people who call themselves Trekkers who sit there with their boxed sets watching avidly for continuity errors etc. In reality there's pretty much no difference other than a Trekker is someone who appears too ashamed and dare I say, a bit too highbrow to call themselves a Trekkie. If people are so concerned about being labeled nerdy or sad then why go to the trouble of labeling yourself?
My Trek heyday has well passed; I only own a selection of the movies on bluray now, including the reboot, which is pretty stunning in hi-def.
I commented in another thread that I'd coerced a few work colleagues to join me for an IMAX screening of Star Trek. The fact that hardly any of them had seen a classic cast Trek movie, let alone a TNG cast one, but came out raving at the reboot proved to me that the film had worked and achieved its primary objective - bring in new viewers by starting afresh.
Re Trekkies and Trekkers, I always understood it to be that Trekkies were original series + original cast movies purists, whereas Trekkers embraced both the original and everything that came after (starting with TNG).
Re Trekkies and Trekkers, I always understood it to be that Trekkies were original series + original cast movies purists, whereas Trekkers embraced both the original and everything that came after (starting with TNG).
There seems to be lots of conflicting opinions. Some say Trekkies are the ones who go to all the conventions dressed up in full Star Fleet regalia and have an entire room dedicated to memorabilia and can quote every single directive from the Star Fleet training manual. Yet Trekkers are just fans of the show/movies and although they are fans of the show, their entire lives are not dominated by Trek.
Others say Trekkers are the high brow version of a Trekkie. The ones who like to be a Trekkie yet don't want the sad and nerdy stigma that's associated with it. So instead they invent a new word for what is essentially the same thing only without the 'sad little nerd' label attached with it.
Then of course there's your analogy that Trekkies follow TOS and Kirk movies and Trekkers are the late commers that embraced TOS after getting into TNG, Voyager and DS9.
But a movie can still bomb with it's fans and still generate record breaking box office sales.
A movie like this will generate a lot of interest with fans old and new as well as it's appeal to non Trekies. So everyone rushes out to see it. It makes good box office sales but that's not to say everyone liked it afterwards. This is why I say you can't go on box office takings. Not everyone who goes to see a film will like it.
It bombed for me personally as well as a lot of the old fans. Maybe not in the global scheme of things no. But with a lot of old fans who remained true to the old format of the tv show and the movie spinoffs.
The 2009 movie for a lot of older fans has left a bad taste in our mouths. I feel this movie has gone down the route to appeal to the wider audience and somehow lost it's way. It's not true to the style or format of the Star Trek we're used to and in my opinion I feel it relied too much on modern special effects and less about the relationships and sub story that generally run through other Star Trek movies. Yes we have the space battles, good vs evil etc but that is only part of the film. Star Trek is known for engaging it's fans with the lives and emotions of the characters but in the 2009 movie I watched it feeling absolutely nothing for them and there wasn't really any sub story with regards to the characters. I guess the sub story was how Kirk was gonna become captain but even the fact he got the title 5 minutes out of rookie school just made it look a bit ridiculous.
I felt the whole thing was cold and emotionless and it's the only Star Trek movie i've watched where i've genuinely thought, I couldn't give a toss whether you all get blown up. And I think that's mainly down to the fact we've not been given the chance to engage with the characters and their emotions prior to seeing this film as we did with TOS and TNG. To be honest I found the majority of the film tedious and boring.
Simon Pegg is just annoying in everything he does and I found his role closer to the mad Doc Brown from Back to the Future than Scotty. It was comical and that's just his appaling Scottish accent. Again his character didn't work for me so I couldn't really feel anything for him.
Kirk has always been slightly swarve and fancied himself as a ladies man and a little bit arrogant at times but at the same time remained likeable and someone I could warm to, whereas this Kirk just came across as a total big headed arrogant cock.
For me it neither had the look or the feel of a Star Trek movie and as a sci-fi film in it's own right I think it was alright but as a Star Trek movie I thought it was absolutely dreadful. It's like they took our cosy little franchise and dragged it kicking and screaming into the 21st century and given it an Ikea style makeover. It's cold, emotionless and lacks all the warmth and character that the previous movies used to have.
I'd go along with this - I DID like Karl Urban as Bones, mind you. But that was all I liked. My inner Trekkie fanboy was appalled at the liberties they took with canon Trek. And destroying Vulcan was uncalled for. But hey, Abrams made his money back, and that's all that matters nowadays!
For the record, I'm one of the few that enjoyed Nemesis!
Yet I would consider the Voyage Home alongside The Undiscovered Country amongst the best of the Original Series movies. The Wrath of Khan may get the Trek vote - but the other two speak to us of things other than spaceships and battles. Of the futility of killing an entire race and how it may hurt us in the future (in this instance Whales) - The Undiscovered Country was a thinly veiled allegory for the fall of the Soviet Empire and it's relationship with the US.
JJ's job was not just to make a film for Trek fans, but to introduce it to people who had never seen any Trek series and in that he succeeded in spades.
A film like Star Trek had a big job to do - not only introducing the characters, but the environment. There will be plenty of time in the future to deal with their relationships.
Incidentally the Voyage Home had the highest gross of any of the original series movies - indeed it was beaten only by the first two next generation movies - Generations and First Contact, and the JJ Abrahms movie.
Comments
Not really huge at all. Casino Royale made $594m worldwide, and QofS took $586m, both on budgets on $200m. Quite how you can spend $200m on a 1 hr 40 min film (QofS), I'm not sure, but that's what Box Office Mojo says.
Exactly what I said earlier. At least someone here agrees with me!
Me neither. He was totally miscast (plus the character of Scotty in the film was very poorly written).
But as for the 2009 version...I adored.
I saw it because there was nothing else on and it turned out to be one of my favourite films of the year. I really did enjoy every moment of it.
Can't wait for the sequel.
Again I apologise for saying it bombed. I didn't like it so read the bad reviews because I wanted to know if it was just me that didn't like it. I found a fair few people who said it was the worst Star Trek movie ever and said it had bombed and obviously I took their word for it before reading all the facts. I now know that it didn't bomb but that doesn't change the fact that I agreed with them. Ok, i'm in a minority but for me it just wasn't the Trek that i'm used to and because of that I didn't like it. I felt the same about the Lost in Space movie. I'm a die hard Lost in Space fan and no matter what, I had to see it but it was so far removed from the spirit, the look and the feel of the original that other than the fact it was a movie about a family called Robinson who got Lost in Space upon the Jupiter II it may as well have been just another Sci-fi movie.
As far as Sci-fi movies go it was alright but for me it wasn't Trek.
2 things spoiled it though;
1) Simon Pegg (i'm the only person who seems to not 'get' him)
2) The last 20 minutes seemed like a tribute to Leonard Nimoy and lost alittle focus on the storyline
1.Wrath of Khan
2.Undiscovered Country
3.Star Trek 2009
4.First Contact
5.The Voyage Home
6.Search for Spock
7.Generations
8.Thd Slowmotion Picture
9.Insurrection
10.Nemesis
11.Final Frontier
1. Star Trek 2009
2. Nemesis
3. Undiscovered Country
4. First Contact
5. Generations
6. Wrath of Khan
7. Insurrection
8. The Voyage Home
9. The Seach for Spock
10. The Motion Picture
11. Final Frontier
2. The Voyage Home
3. The Search for Spock
4. Nemesis
5. Undiscovered Country
6. Star Trek 2009
7. Generations
8. First Contact
9. Insurrection
10. The Motion Picture
11. Final Frontier
Wrath of Khan still stands the test of time and Voyage Home is a Trek film that can be enjoyed by anyone (with the possible exception of devoted trekkies:D). I never really understood the hate for Nemesis. It was very accessible for non-trekkies. An interesting story, well-told and a definite set-up from insurrection..
I know First Contact is worshipped by fans but it doesn't offer much for non-trekkies. I remember a trekkie friend listing all the best bits (cameos from the tv series, the james cromwell character saying "engage!") but they would mean nothing to non-fans.
undiscovered country is ok but the crew are too old and that digital clock on the bridge has always annoyed me as it's never consistent. plenty of good moments though.
only the bottom three on my list aren't worth watching imo.
A men to that. I know its only a small feature on the bridge, but it did stick out. As a recall (my last watch is a while back) Spock says to enter what happened in the log, and gives the time. But he could of just said 'enter it in the log' and it still be the same.
The only other thing I can think of, that wouldnt of bothered me if it was there either way was to to give the feeling like this thing was happening at night time, and its the middle of the night and stuff. On film and TV shows, when things are happening at night, it just gives it a different feel to it.
And with the age thing, your defo right, UC was a good movie to go out with. It was their time. I still feel like I could shed a tear when Kirk gives his final order (that we see on screen anyway) ...and on till morning. A very fitting ending to a super journey that these people have taken.
The worst decision in every respect that Shatner ever made in his career, even worse than singing Rocket Man, was agreeing to appear in Generations. No Shatner, no death of Kirk. Simples.
OP - seriously naive to think that Voyager could ever have worked on the big-screen; it sure as hell didn't work on the small screen (the real tipping point for Trek's downward spiral).
Star Trek 2009, once you got the concept of a reboot / parallel universe prequel, ticked the vast majority of boxes for fans and non-fans alike. If you hanker for the cosy, morality based and traditional Trek tales, you're gonna have to seek comfort from the novels / your DVD collection of the old shows. Star Trek 2009 still incorporated the key relationships, particuarly the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and Bones and had sci-fi/drama and action aplenty. If you can't or dont want to see that from the new movie(s), then you're going to be stuck in your own little time capsule.
For the record, my favourites in order are;
Wrath of Khan
Voyage Home
Search for Spock
First Contact
Star Trek 2009
Undiscovered Country
Insurrection
Final Frontier
Generations
Nemesis
The (slow) Motion Picture
2...The Search For Spock
3...First Contact
4.. The Wrath Of Khan
5...Insurrection
6 Nemesis
7..The Undiscovered Country
8...2009 Reboot
9 ...The Voyage Home
10 ...The Final Frontier
11.. The Motion Picture
btw - $200m Bond budget. I balked too, but I understand those exotic locations really are exotic, and increasingly expensive.
2. Undiscovered Country
3. Star Trek (2009)
4. The Voyage Home
5. The Wrath of Khan
6. Generations
7. Insurrection
8. The Final Frontier
9. Nemesis (zzzzzzz)
10. The Motion Picture (zzzz)
No you're not. He makes my teeth itch
Give the original series on bluray another chance;) Its funny in a way the others weren't, because its so low rent and kirk is so tacky. And you get to see that t&a was a pretty big part of the series from the start, it kind of surprised me that tv back then was more racey than I thought it could be.
Don't you mean Trekkies?
As I understand things, Trekkers was a term invented in the late 80's by Star Trek fans to get away from the stigma associated with the phrase Trekkies so they decided to disassociate themselves as being somehow superior or perhaps less nerdy by calling themselves Trekkers. I know people who call themselves Trekkers who sit there with their boxed sets watching avidly for continuity errors etc. In reality there's pretty much no difference other than a Trekker is someone who appears too ashamed and dare I say, a bit too highbrow to call themselves a Trekkie. If people are so concerned about being labeled nerdy or sad then why go to the trouble of labeling yourself?
My Trek heyday has well passed; I only own a selection of the movies on bluray now, including the reboot, which is pretty stunning in hi-def.
I commented in another thread that I'd coerced a few work colleagues to join me for an IMAX screening of Star Trek. The fact that hardly any of them had seen a classic cast Trek movie, let alone a TNG cast one, but came out raving at the reboot proved to me that the film had worked and achieved its primary objective - bring in new viewers by starting afresh.
Roll on the next one.
There seems to be lots of conflicting opinions. Some say Trekkies are the ones who go to all the conventions dressed up in full Star Fleet regalia and have an entire room dedicated to memorabilia and can quote every single directive from the Star Fleet training manual. Yet Trekkers are just fans of the show/movies and although they are fans of the show, their entire lives are not dominated by Trek.
Others say Trekkers are the high brow version of a Trekkie. The ones who like to be a Trekkie yet don't want the sad and nerdy stigma that's associated with it. So instead they invent a new word for what is essentially the same thing only without the 'sad little nerd' label attached with it.
Then of course there's your analogy that Trekkies follow TOS and Kirk movies and Trekkers are the late commers that embraced TOS after getting into TNG, Voyager and DS9.
Really, The Voyage home is one of my favs...
1. Star Trek (reboot)
2. Wrath of Khan
3. First Contact
4. The Voyage Home
5. The Final Frontier
6. The rest are all just bad and never watch
I'd go along with this - I DID like Karl Urban as Bones, mind you. But that was all I liked. My inner Trekkie fanboy was appalled at the liberties they took with canon Trek. And destroying Vulcan was uncalled for. But hey, Abrams made his money back, and that's all that matters nowadays!
For the record, I'm one of the few that enjoyed Nemesis!
Yet I would consider the Voyage Home alongside The Undiscovered Country amongst the best of the Original Series movies. The Wrath of Khan may get the Trek vote - but the other two speak to us of things other than spaceships and battles. Of the futility of killing an entire race and how it may hurt us in the future (in this instance Whales) - The Undiscovered Country was a thinly veiled allegory for the fall of the Soviet Empire and it's relationship with the US.
JJ's job was not just to make a film for Trek fans, but to introduce it to people who had never seen any Trek series and in that he succeeded in spades.
A film like Star Trek had a big job to do - not only introducing the characters, but the environment. There will be plenty of time in the future to deal with their relationships.
Incidentally the Voyage Home had the highest gross of any of the original series movies - indeed it was beaten only by the first two next generation movies - Generations and First Contact, and the JJ Abrahms movie.
see http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/seriesStarTrek.php for the figures