Amph JJ Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness

I adjusted some of your numbers (caveat: Wiki) using worldwide grosses, as I'm sure we'd like to compare apples to apples or to fill in values missing.

Oh, look, Star Trek V didn't have much of an impact on the bottom-line of VI! But, really, Star Trek (2009) was good -- it just wasn't really the same kind of Star Trek that existed prior, even in TNG era (no matter how bad Nemesis was). And I really don't think they will continue this with a 2.5x ROI, when they showed they could make films -- with the right characterizations and stories -- with vasty better ROI for cheaper...

 

I just don't understand how someone can dislike First Contact, either as a Star Trek movie or a movie in its own right. Somebody hug me.

 

Thanks, that's helpful. so, really, WoK is the Trek box office champion, which it deserved to be with by far the best and most Trek-like story of the series. IV is right behind it though and to be fair, it offers a very Trek-like story too, and even though it devolves into self-parody, the OS wasn't above that either.

District 9 proved it's still possible to make high end sci fi for less than $50 million, despite three decades of production inflation since TMP, and I wouldn't object to staying true to old Trek on a modest budget. Traditional values Trek doesn't translate to big summer tentpole pics.

 

edit: nevermind

 

ST II (OC) 8.82
ST IV (OC) 6.33
ST III (OC) 5.44
ST VI (OC) 3.59
ST VII (NG + S) 3.37
ST VIII (NG) 3.24
Star Trek (OC) 3.02
ST XI (NC + N) 2.56
ST IX (NG) 1.93
ST V (OC) 1.91
ST X (NG) 1.12

OC = original cast
NG = Next Generation cast
NG + S = Next Gen + Shatner
NC + N) = new cast + Nimoy

Looking at ROI with dp4m's numbers, there's a pretty clear dividing line between the next gen and the original cast in terms of the profitability of the franchise. No one would ever consider rebooting Next Generation Trek, for reasons that are obvious.

But Abrams Trek is really bridging that gap between the modestly profitable and the flops. Objectively speaking, there's no reason he should be tasked with building a global general movie audience for Trek.

 

I agree with almost all of that. However, I think traditional-Trek could translate to big summer tentpole -- just not with any of the storylines we've seen thus far (and also, TMP looked gorgeous and was well worth the money, even if too long).

 

Nothing has compared to TMP in terms of showing off the Enterprise. And that plus cast nostalgia was enough to help the movie turn a modest profit.

 

This conversation is getting so boring. Can we talk about Star Trek instead of business?

 

I cant wait for this movie... The extended preview I saw during the Hobbit looked great.

 

The real fun this year is in original sci fi. Oblivion, After Earth, Elysium, Pacific Rim, Gravity and Ender's Game.

After that comes the franchise sci fi

Star Trek and Catching Fire

and after that comes the sci fi wannabe comic book stuff:

Iron Man 3, Man of Steel

I'm only counting on two of these movies to be any good, but will be happy if the ratio is better.

 

What about Thor 2: The Dark World?

I'm looking forward to with the original stuff PacRim, Elysium and Gravity

Star Trek or else I wouldn't be in this thread.

And IM3 and MoS.

 

Has anyone seen "The Captains"? Turns out Patrick Stewart is as boring in real life as he was as captain Picard, and Chris Pine seems to have a good head on his shoulders. And Kate Mulgrew needs a hug even more than Coruscant.

Shatner's stock went way up with that documentary. The man is really an artistic genius. I would definitely want to fight him.

 

I thought The Captains was boring, typical Shatner ego-stroking, and I'm an actual Star Trek fan. The best part was when he and Avery Brooks appeared to be having a contest as to who could act more eccentric.

 

I'm excited for the space battles. Probably more than I should be but whatever. Here are some gifs

Spoiler

 

Yes, this is a nitpick, but why did they change phasers to Star Wars lasers? What was the point of that beyond Abrams' beating us over the head with his intent?

 

See, the USS Kelvin disaster gave a young engineer called, uh, Emile Blaster the resolve to develop his concept of laser weaponry and...

 

I think the Defiant's pulse-phaser cannons started that particular rot, way back in DS9.

 

I have not .... yet. Instant queued! It sounds interesting

 

Actually the TOS phasers had both Pulse and beam configurations.

the Klingons used pulse configured disruptors, Romulans use both beam and pulse disruptors in all series. And in the TOS phasers ere red, But the out every orifice beam spam was abrams attempt to borrow from star wars. Make Trek more general appeal.

Star Trek battles are more Submarine and Golden age of exploration style fighting, because ships have to work around "design" issues. there are supose to be reasons federation ships, romulan ships and klingon ships follow their design patterns.

 

WoK had phaser-fire between the Reliant and the Enterprise.

 

Please don't mention enterprise...that era had such potential only to be drowned in the mediocraty and rehashing of Rick Berman and Brendon Brannon.

Sigh, the rehash of the saucer design, using hull plating and another version of Shields. Then the "Phase" pistols and "Phase" cannons. It boggles my mind how Paramount left those two at the helm so long when it was so obvious they had zero creativity left.