I don't think it's dead. Things started to go downhill after First Contact because the quality was going with it as well. I still think it can be brought back as a TV show, you just need a person who has the right idea, knows the universe intimately, and knows how to write.Cheebs said:
Well JJ Abrams was handed the keys to the franchise and Gene Roddenberry's (and Rick Berman's) old job. So you just gotta live with what Abrams wants to churn out be it movies or tv shows down the line.Dax01 said:
Cheebs said:
I don't think it is.
What do you mean no it isn't? He isnt just the director of the movie. He has say over the franchise. He has shown this in his statements how he said he wont make a tv show now and maybe will consider it down the line one day....etc.Dax01 said:
What do you mean he is? How does he have say over the franchise? And don't just tell me, provide me with a link.Cheebs said:
I dont have a link off hand it was ages ago. He wasnt just hired as the director or anything. He wasnt even going to direct it at first, just produce it and write the story outline but decided for the first film he should do it himself. And he was asked about any new tv shows and he said HE wont put any on tv any time soon because he thought having films and tv shows at once diluted the brand, and HE may do it down the line. That is someone who is speaking on behalf of the franchise, period.Dax01 said:
Why not? That's exactly what happened. Enterprise got cancelled because it couldn't produce mainstream numbers, after which there was a lot of talk about the whole franchise being put on indefinite hiatus because it had become so hardcore and hostile to casual audiences that it needed a long break until a fresh direction could be found. You even had Activision suing Paramount for mis-managing the franchise, things had gotten so bad. It was only when JJ and co. came along with a take designed to appeal to fans and mainstream alike that Paramount agreed to bring Trek back from the dead. If it wasn't for this movie Trek would most likely have continued to stay in hibernation for a long time to come.Dax01 said:
That can be taken in many different ways.Cheebs said:
I'm in denial? Okay.
Gary Whitta said:
I'm okay with that. I'd rather be left with what I have now than have some crappy movie in attempt to revive it.
That's exactly what the hardcore fanbase thinks. They are their own worst enemy.Cheebs said:
The mass mainstream public's only real knowledge of Star Trek is Kirk, Spock, and "that whale movie". That is about it.Gary Whitta said:
Cheebs said:
Gary Whitta said:
Yup, and that's exactly why a reboot of the TOS characters was the only viable way to resurrect Trek in the mainstream. When the non-hardcore (ie almost everyone) think of Star Trek they think of Kirk, Spock and Klingons, with Picard, TNG and everything else a distant second. That's why the TNG movies produced ever-dwindling returns; mainstream audiences just weren't interested. For Trek to become a hit again it *has* to be Kirk and Spock, and it has to be with younger actors. Painful for the hardcore to accept, but it's either that or let the franchise lay dormant.Cheebs said:
LOL that film does not get enough credit.Cheebs said:What trekkies need to remember is that to the mainstream public THIS is Star Trek:
Cheebs said:
And some of the best of the TV eps have been time travel-based too.Cheebs said:
Gary Whitta said:
Seems like a natural extension for Trek since Kurk and Uhura shared that famous first inter-racial kiss on TV, and of course for this movie to be true to the character he HAS to shag someone.Cheebs said:
Cheebs said:
How so?Sir Fragula said:
Anasui Kishibe said:
Dax01 said:
Cheebs said:
JayDubya said:
JayDubya said:Sounds like Kirk alright.
Incidentally, never liked Kirk.
Cheebs said:
Anasui Kishibe said:
Oh it's on now!OuterWorldVoice said:
Marty Chinn said:
OuterWorldVoice said:
Cheebs said:
Whether they indeed rewrite history remains to be seen. Like I've said, I think that the time travel plot is pivotal not because of the idea of time travel, but because Nimoy serves to anchor the entire picture and provides a proper contrast that illuminates so much of what made TOS great. If they then on top of that decide to rewrite the history, then it's probably because that happens to be a proper explanation as to how they can carve out an entire film series without disrupting the rest of the history that fans hold so dear. They could just opt for a straight out reboot, but if they're already including the time travel, then they are connecting it to the larger arc of Trek already, and an explanation is probably needed. But we have to see how the movie turns out first.Phoenix said:
Quality helped to destroy Trek completely, but there is this basic tenet when serving a product that people will get bored of the same thing produced indefinitely. In other words, I think that the entire Trek empire was destined to collapse no matter how good it was. Perhaps if the quality had been there, true Trek fans might have been able to sustain it longer, and we wouldn't be in the situation where we literally need Kirk and Spock. But like I've been saying, I don't think that Trek could keep swapping in new crews and hold that up as innovation. People are going to get sick of that. And the problem with Star Trek is that it can literally get too big so that new fans are hard to bring in. Trek should have stopped at DS9, but I think that the complete collapse of Trek brought about what should have already happened, and this probably is the only way to turn Trek into a mega franchise.JayDubya said:
