In an earlier post today I made the comment that the Star Trek franchise was dead. Since then I’ve got some comments and email from people protesting that I said it. But honeslty folks… it’s true.
When a franchise reaches a point where it’s starting to lose some of its old fans… and yet at the same time not making any new fans… well… that’s death.
Star Trek (as much as I have loved it) is dead in its current incarnation. It has no where left to go, and I’m apparently not the only one who knows it.
A couple of people have raised a good point to me. An email said "John, how can you call Star Trek dead when it stil has million upon millions of devoted fans still here in the US alone". That’s a fair question. But in a response to someone in the comments section who raised a similar point I said this:
Zillions of Trekkies?
Ok, so where were these "zillions" of Trekkies?
Star Trek Nemesis: $43 million (YIKES! it’s Dead Jim!)
First Contact: $93 million
Insurrection: $70 million
Generations: $75 million
Undiscovered Country: $74 millionHell… Superman Returns has made more money than any of the "recent" Star Trek films did in just 6 days!
I ask again… where are these "zillions" of trekkies?
I’m a huge Sci-Fi fan… and yes that includes Star Trek. But just because I love it doesn’t change the fact that it is indeed dead. I was out for dinner with Darren and his wife last night after the Audio Edition, and Darren brought up a reat idea…
They should "restart" Star Trek, much in the same way they restarted Battlestar Galactica. Recast it, reinvision it. Just redo everything. Make Scotty a hot blonde or something. Just start the story over. i think that’s the only way you can resurect this franchise. In its curent form it’s just stale and old with no where left to go.
Just just my opinion… but I’m sticking with it.
Cool site. Thank you!
Cool site. Thank you!
Cool site. Thanks!
Cool site. Thank you.
Cool site. Thanks!
Cool site. Thanks!
Oh well, you can see it here…
http://www.boxofficeguru.com/intlarch5.htm
Hmm, trying that table again
Box Office (US$M)
Int’l Domestic Worldwide %Foreign %Domestic
Generations 42.4 75.6 118.0 35.9% 64.1%
First Contact 54.0 91.8 145.8 37.0% 63.0%
Insurrection 47.7 70.2 117.9 40.5% 59.5%
Nemesis 23.6 43.1 66.7 35.4% 64.6%
(data from http://www.boxofficeguru.com)
A Star Trek apologist above made reference to foreign markets but the global picture is bleaker, not brighter…and Nemesis stands out as even more of a disaster.
Box Office (US$M)
Int’l Domestic Worldwide %Foreign %Domestic
Generations 42.4 75.6 118.0 35.9% 64.1%
First Contact 54.0 91.8 145.8 37.0% 63.0%
Insurrection 47.7 70.2 117.9 40.5% 59.5%
Nemesis 23.6 43.1 66.7 35.4% 64.6%
(data from http://www.boxofficeguru.com)
I’m curious why the international grosses are so low…Most sci fi/ action pix get 45-55% of their receipts overseas, Treks only seem to manage around 35%. Is it poor marketing? I would guess that the films are harder to sell in markets where TNG and the other series were less widely shown, but clearly somebody stumbled and they lost momentum from First Contact on…
Forget about reinvisioning it. There is an entire universe there full of content to exploit. I’m not really up to speed with some the things which occured so bear with me. Voyage returns from the delta quadrant with vast knowledge of new species with technolgy superior to their in some regards. The borg are not dead(in the hive a female usually asserts herself as the new queen when one dies). what happened to the Jem ha Dar, or for that matter the dominion, the coaxial warp technology which could make regular warp travel outmoded exists and has not been persued. With regards to Movie ideas what happened the the omega directive. People were experimenting with that dangerous molecule. That’s worth some exploration. And I understand that from the timline in voyager that the federation was rebuilding from the war with the dominion. Isn’t the best time to strike at an enemy when they are at their weakest. Seems to me to be the perfect time to bring a force against the federation for the final crippling blow. Now that would be some kind of movie. The reason the franchise seems dead is because people aren’t tapping the right people for ideas and want completed screenplays that they can edit. take and idea write out a general plot. See if it can really capture the audience. And note to the produecers of the Star Trek Franchise. You don’t need the TNG crew to carry the brunt of the work .Voyager’s crew has seen plenty of action. It’s time to send in the replacements.
One of the more interesting plot lines in Star Trek TNG was the battle for the soul of the federation. Those that are trying to hold onto the old values and those that saw only enemies surronding them and would do whatever it took to fight back.
It may be interesting to take the POV from a different race, political group or some other group that has interaction with the federation. That internal federation battle can be played out but all we can see is the results, the impact of it. Might be interesting. Each episode can bring us closer to political upheaval in the federation, or possibly even civil war.
It’s been dead for a while. They milked it til it fell over. TNG was great. DS9 got interesting, once they gave them a spaceship. Voyager? I called that Star Trek: Lost in Space. Enterprise was an interesting idea, but couldn’t escape the franchise rut. Zimmerman is a tremendous designer, but by now his style is pretty clearly definable. The musical underscoring that served TNG so well, was old and boring in Enterprise.
All the things that went into creating a franchise, ended up choking it. There were no surprises left. It was luke warm and a little too familiar.
They should have cleared everyone out and brought in a whole new POV. They didn’t and Star Trek died in a slow motion train wreck. RIP
I always wanted to see a move with Sulu as captain of the Excelsior. We saw a piece of that in STVI:Undiscovered Country, and in a Voyager episode.
I’m a trekkie from Sweden and I’m sad to admit that I tend to agree with what John is saying. I’m 25 and have been interested in Star Trek sinc under 10 years of age. Star Trek First Contact is my favorite but they should let Star Trek rest for a couple of years and some people should sit down and create lots of scripts in one go. If the scripts is good enought, then they can make a new show. I met Marina Sirtis (she was very nice to talk with) on a fair in Sweden last year and she don’t think that the TNG crew will be back for another movie. Live long and prosper!
I have never cared that much for Star Trek in any shape, fashion or form. Except i did like the first movie (bald chicks do it for me). The original show has is interesting only in a goofy factor for me, TNG was okay when it started out, but everytime i tuned in (on a VERY casual basis) it was either Q being Q or a misadventure in the holodeck. DUMB AND BORING. I saw one episode of Enterprise when i was drunk and nothing else was on TV, it didn’t light me up.
The sad thing is, I love sci-fi and fantasy and give tremendous latitiude to even the lamest of attempts…. but for some reason, Trek has NEVER done a thing for me.
I just don’t give a shit, no matter what they try in the star trek verse, it does not click with me.
If they want me, and i’m sure there are others like me, to tune in and give it a shot….. SHAKE THAT SHIT UP! There is too much competition (and doing a much more interesting job of it) out there.
“No star trek movie has losted money.”
I just want you to know that the word “losted” doesn’t exist, much like the fictional future world that Star Trek takes place in.
I almost agree with John, but I don’t think ST is ever coming back to the popularity that it had when Patrick Stewart was the captain. They’ve tried to “reinvent” it and it hasn’t worked. I’m happy for the memories, at this point. I don’t expect it to come back at all, at this point – much less come back to it’s former glory.
I somewhat agree with you Dr. theopolis, however…all the marketing in the world is not going to make a crappy movie good when you finally sit in the theater and watch it.
You are exactly right about the marketing aspect, especially when it concerns the movies. However, Voyager was terrible and Enterprise…well, Enterprise had ALL the same writers as Voyager and was equally as terrible.
btw, all you die-hards still trying to hold onto any trek you can find can hate me all you want but Voyager was bad and Enterprise was Horrible no matter what you say. They were not a 10th of the show that Next Gen/DS9 was.
I do agree with you DR. about all the behind-the-scenes drama going on. It is abyssmal that they let all this infighting get in the way of the franchise making money and the fans being happy. the simple thing is: the better the movie the better the word of mouth is and the more people want to see it.
Look, in my experience, when a new Trek movie comes out the first thing the non-Trekker sci-fi fans do is ask their one Trekker friend(and everyon’e got one) how it was.
Paramount keeps trying to get the casual movie audience and forget the Trekkers/Trekkies. Well the fact is those die-hard fans see the movies first and if they sit around at work the next day saying it sucks then the casual fans definitely won’t spend $8.00 on it. Word of mouth on these films is HUGE.
I don’t get paramount’s financial strategy. It is not the casual fans that are buying the merchandise, it is the die-hard fans that buy the lunch-boxes, action figures, video games, ect. It only makes sense to please the die-hard fans as well as the casual fans.
the failure that was Nemesis had less to do with the (admittedly) less-than-great story but with Paramount corporate and the marketing team.
behind-the-scenes scuttle with Majel Roddenberry and her son caused Par to say “F-U”. apparently, the Roddenberry estate is owed $$$ each time anything copyrighted or trademarked is shown or used. that is why there is no costume, insignia or ship in the marketing of Nemesis – not that it would have made the story any better, mind you. but the studio was tired of being held hostage to Roddenberry, who was in turn trying to put the screws to the studio for another season or possibly a movie of Andromeda.
so, really, when it comes down to it, it’s really about the studio shooting itself and its investment in the franchise’s viability in the foot rather than the evil Braga or Berman running the franchise into the ground. i still think there’s life left in them-thar deck plates!
we all know marketing makes or breaks a movie. there have been bad movies that have had massive marketing campaigns and yet they are still a hit. had Par promoted Star Trek correctly, AND released it at the same time of the year, as was the Trek custom, it might have done a lot better – at least as well as Insurrection (which i always viewed as a episode of the series as opposed to warranting big-screen treatment).
it’s really never as cut-n-dry as people think.
my 2¢
Rebooting Star Trek isnt a bad idea, if they must do anything. In the Star Trek mythos, the reboot could just be an alternate universe. Mirror Mirror type thing.
I agree with Stuart—-
There are certain things that should be let go BUT Stewie, bc this is a capatilist society we live in people want money…no matter what.
Star Trek
Rocky
Indy
Bond
there are certain things that at some points should just be let go and die in respect….
with that said, I really believe in Casino Royale
and Indy 4 is supposedly going to work somehow but you have a lot of convincing to do for that one.
You are right! The Star Trek franchise is dead, and its all because of Paramount. They have systematically ruined one of the biggest franchises out there. It’s sad when a major movie and TV company doesn’t realize what a franchise they have and let it go to crap.
How could they let their obvious disdain for their own fanbase get in the way a desire to make money. I don’t get it. Paramount has, for years, treated Trekkies like crap and acted like they were almost embarrased by them.
The big problem is that once paramount forced Gene Roddenberry out and took complete control of the franchise, there was no single controlling force guiding Trek. After that, Trek had no George Lucas to guide it. Paramount should have followed Fox’s example and left creative control to the creative people.
I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again: STAR TREK DIED THE DAY PARAMOUNT EXECS STARTED MAKING CREATIVE DECISIONS. If you don’t believe me read William Shatner’s great book STAR TREK: MOVIE MEMORIES. It shows clearly that from Star Trek II on, the filmakers were forced to preview all movie rough cuts for Paramount execs who then made their own creative decisions involving editing. Focus testing?!! I don’t think so!
The best statement made about where Trek is today was made by Robert Beltran who played Chakotay on Voyager. He was interviewedthe day after Voyager ended and he was legally free to speak out against the producers. He stated something that many trekkers suspected for years but never confirmed. He said that “Rick Berman and the producers are coming up with the stories and the writers are only writing the scripts. If the producers wanted to write then they should have gotten degrees in creative writing.” that is as close to word for word paraphrasing as i can get. There was much for in that interview if you can find it.
It is amazing to me that the micromanagement from Rick berman and co. got so bad that they(guys with business and marketing degrees) took over writing duties from the writers.
I agree with earlier statements. Paramount, give up your huge egos and let J.M. Strazynski and co. restart the Trek TV franchise before it is buried forever.
Reboot, prequel, sequel, reimagining, remake…
HERE’S A NOVEL IDEA! HOW ABOUT PUTTING THE SERIES TO REST FOR GOOD AND WORKING ON SOME ORIGINAL PROJECTS INSTEAD OF JUST RETOOLING SOME ORIGINAL PROJECT AND SLAPPING A BRAND-NAME ON IT WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU’LL GET HERE ANYWAY.
Seriously, this is worse than Bond. Give the series the respect it deserves and just LET IT GO.
Flog a horse to death, perform a resurrection, then flog it back to death.
Seriously, some things deserve to die with dignity, movie series among them.
Star Trek has been leaking fans for years. BUT I’m still a believer in it’s magic.
I am in a minority viewpoint that the shows that killed it were the Deep Space nine and Voyager series. I don’t know much about Enterprise, but alot of people have given me hell about not liking DS9. Alledgedly it was an awesome show. It never appealed to me though.
I still say, given the right script and cast, there could be a HUGE market for this type fo Sci Fi.
Star Wars had the market on “Spiritual Sci Fi.” Star Trek is kinda like the “Learned Man’s Sci Fi.” it was much more cerebral and that’s what made it great. Maybe making it an action series ( which I applaud and praise the Next Generation cast for doing ) is what turned the hardcore veterans away.
who knows. time to sit and wait, eh?
Good thing you aren’t in charge of animal care.
Jockey:”That horse didn’t run very well today.”
You:”Well, he must be dead.”
Jockey:”Maybe the track was too wet due to rain.”
You: *Shoots horse dead*
Stop blaming the wrong thing. The producers and executives screwed up Star Trek.
I hope they don’t reboot it like BSG. If you want to watch a soap opera, just watch one. Stop turning sci-fi shows into soap operas.
That includes you Russel T Davies. Adding blowjob with concrete jokes to Doctor Who isn’t the way to reboot it.
Well there is a new star trek film being shot now. It is more like ‘that 70’s show’ and ‘Clerks’ meets Star Trek. That sounds weird but I know the guy who wrote and is directing it. He will not let me give anymore than that away. He may get mad I gave away that much. It also is the same film that had Tom Hanks attached to the franchise before. No he wont play a starfleet captain.
The Enterprise gets destroyed in almost every film. If they just killed off one or two members of the cast every time they blew up the Enterprise and replaced them with someone new they’d have a whole new show by now. Instead they just keep rehashing the same tired old themes. Kill all the cast off and blow up the Enterprise for once and for all and start a whole new saga and keep changing it every film. Then maybe they could build a new audience?
WolfMarauder wrote:
“On the audio commentary for Star Trek: First Contact, Branon Braga and Ronald D. Moore, the writers, agree. They said that they have become trapped by the continuity of Star Trek, and both feel that the only solution is to reboot that continuity and start fresh with a “new” Star Trek.”
It seems to me that Enterprise was an attempt to do just that (even if it was a poor one). I know some who’s biggest gripe was that the series didn’t follow “established” continuity.
Just a thought…
Okay, I’m too lazy to read ALL the comment (sorry to all) but Merrit, Nord (agreed) and Darren made the points I agree with. Star Trek isn’t dead. The past has had bumps, but I can’t say it’s dead. I think it could be revived – it just needs the right script for a movie and/or series.
NO JOHN!
You know i value your opinon alot when comes to movies and ideas… but i think that one of the dumbest things you’ve ever said!!! Rebot star trek by doing it over?! NO! One of the only great things about star trek is the orignal episodes!!! Not to mention that every other series after that is based off those episodes and what happened in them! It would be like destroying the space time continuum!!!
NO! BAD JOHN! NO!
After the disaster that was Nemisis, I have pretty much stopped watching. Mostly because I am sick of getting my heart broken every time they turn out more crap.
I don’t think the franchise is dead but the powers that be need to give it more time before plunging back into the ST waters. I’d love to see a re-imagining but I don’t think the studios will go for that.
I promise this will be the last time I ever triple-post, but this website is very funny and actually has something decent to say about Enterprise.
http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/index.php3
Oh, and as for the movies I always thought they suffered from the same thing: Having to put sci-fi action in there to please a general audience. My favourite of the TNG movies is Insurrection because it at least seemed to try and be about something.
First Contact is good once you’ve gotten into the show, but its too centered around the characters to make other people really enjoy it.
I for one would prefer if Star Trek went more the route of TNG, and made itself smart again. The episodes i caught of Enterprise all had glaring plotholes, and seemed like an average action show. Example:
One night a caught both a TNG episode and an Enterprise episode. The TNG episode was “Genesis” and I don’t remember the name of the Enterprise episode, but it was the one where T’Pol was exposed to the material that made her feelings run amok…If anybody knows which one that is.
The point is, that they were both centered around a few characters entering a place of unknown dangers, and while the TNG episode focused on the characters trying to figure out what had happened with their minds, and focused heavily on the hitchcockian school of horror “that which you don’t see is more scary” – the Enterprise episode within 10-15 minutes had the characters killing unknown enemies with laser rifles. It disappointed me greatly to see what Trek had become.
By all means do a new show, but at least do your best to put the intelligence and innocence back in the show. Don’t make an action show, there are plenty of those.
Hollywood should make more good, hard sci-fi like Blade Runner, Alien, Minority Report, 2001, Gattaca, Contact, 12 monkeys … and bury cartoony space cowboy crap like Star Trek and Star Wars.
I’ve been secretly hoping that someone like HBO or Showtime would do A Trek series. Obviously wouldn’t happen but I want to hear grity Starfleet officers behaving like they’re really out in the thick of it. Enterprise bored me to tears. While Archer gets a little more unshaven towards the end it always seemed to be holding back.
I say take off the gloves and show humanity in all its piss and shit. Most truely great dramas are not afraid to use violence, sex or language to drive drama. That’s why BSG works so well. People are crying out for the hard hitting characterisation of things like Sopranos, The Shield etc to be implimented in sci-fi because everything is now the same formulaic, family orientated Stargate clones which recycle ideas and generally have no edge.
Even just look at how we’ve gone from Kirk to Archer – serial space shagger to cub scout! Give us a kick in the balls. PLEASE ! ! !
On the audio commentary for Star Trek: First Contact, Branon Braga and Ronald D. Moore, the writers, agree. They said that they have become trapped by the continuity of Star Trek, and both feel that the only solution is to reboot that continuity and start fresh with a “new” Star Trek.
Please…i speak croatish….do you know for film FLUKE A CARLO CARLEI FILM (1995.)???? I WANNA FIND HIM!!!!
Personally, I’m not sure that I’d like a “reboot” given that I’m attached to the original characters.
Anyone that thinks that the recent Battlestar reboot is any good really needs to rewatch the originals.
That said, perhaps it just needs a 10+ year hiatus, like Dr Who?
Sorry about the double post my browser went all wonky on me…
Something else worth mentioning is that the budget of a movie may also include the marketing money, which is going to have a HUGE effect on how many people see it.
Personally I don’t think the box office numbers mean there are any less Star Trek fans around today than there were 10 or 20 years ago. It may be fair to say that less “casual” movie-goers went out to see the recent Star Trek movies. But I also think that compared to the 80’s, there’s a lot more competition at the box office now and the recent Trek films got driven out of theatres a lot more quickly.
But I’m certainly not defending the last few Star Trek movies, as they all pretty much sucked. I do think, however, that First Contact shows there is still potential there if you find the right story.
— Sean
FilmJunk.com
Something else worth mentioning is that the budget of a movie may also include the marketing money, which is going to have a HUGE effect on how many people see it.
Personally I don’t think the box office numbers mean there are any less Star Trek fans around today than there were 10 or 20 years ago. It may be fair to say that less casual movie-goers went out to see the recent Star Trek movies. But I also think compared to the 80’s, there’s a lot more competition and they got driven out of theatres a lot quickly.
I think the only point to be made here is that the last few Star Trek movies have sucked… which I wholeheartedly agree with.
“Make Scotty a hot blonde or something”
Didn’t they do that already… in Galaxy Quest? :P
Apparently the definition of ‘gay’ has morphed into something else the last few years.
if batman can make a come back after batman and robin then I think star trek can come back too….
the only crime the star trek movies commietted was they got fucking boring…they never became embarrassingly awful just boring as hell.
it will take a lot to revitalise it but there is no way paramount are going to let a potential earner like star trek totally die.
I like the sound of jj abrams taking over and setting a film at starfleet academy with a young kirk and spock almost as rivals…
I heard he had already approached matt damon about it and he is considering it….the affleck thing as spock thing was tounge in cheek ..that aint going to happen but if matt damon says yes paramount will definitely go ahead with it……
according to the article I read damon is interested i mean who wouldn’t want to play kirk?
Haha… say what Nord? That the numbers and total lack of any creativity anymore prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that Star Trek is a dead franchise with fading popularity that isn’t nearly as popular as many people seem to think it is???
Ok… i just said it.
:)
HAHA! Jay shoots and SCORES!!!! Well done grasshopper!
As far as your points… Yes… i was only counting Domestic… because I was only comparing it to domestic.
However, if you take Nemesis for example, it only made about $20 million more internationally. Thus… even with the full international boxoffice it made under $70 million.
And look… a full wide release picture is a full wide release picture. My point with the numbers was only to show the waining interest in the Star Trek franchise. It’s not as popular as so many people seem to think it is.
I still envy the belt buckle though. :)
John, you cant win, the crowd is in a frenzy, they are chanting and salivating at your impending defeat, they are imploring you, just say it, SAY IT FOR THE LOVE ALL THAT IS HOLY MAN!!!!
SAY IT!!!
Also, your numbers seem to be only covering domestic gross. Worldwide those films made a whole lot more, and i will bet my Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan belt buckle that those films cost a fraction of what Superman Returns cost to make.
Jay C.
http://www.filmjunk.com
P.S. John, mission accomplished with the girl at Red Square…i am a man now!
I would think that the price tag of a movie would play a pretty massive role seeing as in the end it doesn’t come down to the number of people, but rather the profit margin. A movies success is relative to it’s numbers. If a film cost 2 million to make and made 20 million in theatres, that’s a huge success. Sure not as many people went to see it, but in the end it made 10 times it’s orginal cost and turned a massive profit.
Jay C.
http://www.filmjunk.com
Battlestar Galactica waited. That would be the difference.
If Star Trak franchise owners let it simmer–let it rest. Have none of the franchise owners learned anything for George Lucas and the re-release of the Star Wars movies??
For a money making re-release of something popular, the trick is do nothing for the appropriate amount of time.
What on earth does the price tag of the movie have to do with how many people wanted to see it?!?!
“Superman cost $200 million to make so it doesn’t count”. Ummm… how do you figure? People either go to see the Star Trek stuff or they don’t. I don’t care if it cost $400 million or $400 bucks. People don’t go see them them to the degree of it’s aleged fan base.
The Star Trek fan base isn’t that big. They’re just a fanatical bunch (which is FANTASTIC! i wish more fans were as passionate about their stuff as Star Trek Fans), but there just aren’t as many of them as a lot of people seem to think.
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/800/home.php
Uh no, not dead, just extremely gay
nord
Ugh.
Considering the majority of ST movies do not have a price tag of 200+ million a piece, and not counting inflated prices, I fail to see John’s arguement to restart Trek.
Just pick up after Nemesis, and get Enterprise F, G, H, I or whatever letter they are on, get a new crew, that’s that. Red shirts are not needed; any character can bite the dust at any moment in time.
Regardless–just as long as Brannon Braga and Ron Moore are not involved, everyone is safe. But you know something? With the exception of ‘First Contact’? Nearly all the ST:TNG movies have paled in comparison to the ST:OS films. I think some one should bring back Nicholas Meyer.
There is no need to reboot, reimagine or redo Trek.
However,
we have Stargate and Stargate Atalantis, BSG, we had Bab 5 and Farscape; Trek was good, sometimes great…but it had very little, if any, competitors at the summit of its success.
I say new cast, new ‘Prise, new mission. post Nemesis.
A reboot won’t work – there are too many movies and TV series built upon the original series.
Star Trek has been called dead so many times that I will reserve judgement on that statement. After 1969 and until 1979 I would have agreed with it.
Not any more.
On another tack, check out this nonprofessional site:
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/800/home.php
Is this the site of a dead franchise?
Well put.
I think Rob Merritt said it better than I ever could soooo….read above.
nord
I don’t agree that Voyager stank – it’s my favourite right after TNG. I still think this would be a great movie. As for the restart idea, I think A.J. is completely right. It worked for BSG but it may not necessarily work for ST. I don’t really want to see another Kirk. It just wouldn’t be the same. I think it’s too big for a re-invent.
Wow, you mean $40 million dollar movies released 10+ years ago in december on a non-holiday weeekend made less money than a $260 million dollar movie released this year during a holiday? No wonder star trek failed. Instead of making 6 movies that made together over 700 million world wide, they should of just been stuck in development hell for 20 years and release one movie that isn’t even a top money maker this year and most experts aren’t even sure it will make back it budget. John, Hollywood should just snatch you up right now.
No star trek movie has losted money. Its clear that the last two movies haven’t stirred the fan based. I think there are still millions of Star Trek fans. I don’t think its a sign that people don’t like Trek. The problem is they have gotten tired of crappy product. Most of the Next Generation movies have sucked. Most of the episodes of Enterprise and Voyager sucked. The fact the fan based stood buy the franchise so long should be clear that we want more. The DVDs are still selling very well. The ratings of The original series are been really good for G4. The Next Generation and Deep Space 9 still pull in great numbers for syndicated rerun shows world wide. Also its clear they are going to make another movie, no matter what. So Trek isn’t dead. Not yet. I think if Paramount puts out something good, it will do very ver well at the box office.
Now, the question remainds, what should they do? They have two realistic options in my mind. Either do another movie with the remaining available cast from the original series… OR like has been mentioned, a BSG style reboot of the original series. The first idea stands that William Shatner still has some clout with fans and his last outting in Generations has always been a sort of a sore spot with fans.
I agree.
I don’t know if Star Trek needs a reboot… It was fine for BSG which had pretty small fanbase to begin with (at least compared to Trek).
And I always though it was a pretty bad show anyway =) At least there has been some good Trek stuff over the years. (The new BSG thankfully might be the best TV-series ever.)
I think there are still possibilities in the existing ST universe to tell a compelling story. I’m not a big fan of these prequel plans though… to me Star Trek movie is not a proper Star Trek movie without the Enterprise. Of course, a good story and a good characters are needed. Personally, I would not be happy to see a reimagined Kirk or Spock with a reimagined Enterprise flying in a reimagined Federation. And I’m not even a hardcore ST fan.
I’m pretty sure if there’s going to be a new ST movie, it won’t be a reboot.
Hey
As much i do like some of the Star Trek stuff it is more or less dead and i think that idea to start over again is fabulous. I personal thing that would be great, also just to see what way it would be done and the people they would get!
Beam me up scotty!
They actually already tried to do just that but the studios rejected it. check out this link –
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
its a proposal by Bryce Zabel and J. Michael Straczynski. To me it sounded pretty cool, but who knows why the studios deemed it unworthy.