Is LOTR becoming SW as SW became Star Trek?

I know that some of this might be a little redundant but I believe a fresh, viable, discussion can be created in this thread.

In the late 60s Star Trek premeired on the small screen and sci-fi fans were hooked. A fan-base was created(not as complicated as today).

In the late 70s SW burst onto the scene and became the new sci-fi champion even though Star Trek was still around it was mainly supported by rabid fans that the general public made fun of. Over the years of the OT premeires, Star Trek produced features and competed w/SW but was never thought of as better than SW in the general public's eyes. Star Trek still had it loyal fan-base.

Now, today we have SW and LOTR. SW has its loyal fan-base but yet LOTR it touted as better in the general public eye, and to a point SW is made fun of by the general public.

Has the torch been passed to LOTR?

Comments/Discussion?

 

Dude, the public "eye" is the critics, who are brain dead.

 

I agree, but SW and Star Trek are now largely supported by the fan-base like us and not the general public.

LOTR has the best of both worlds right now, that SW and Star Trek used to enjoy.

I guess my question is how does it get to that point?

 

>>I guess my question is how does it get to that point?<<

Well, first you re-edit classic films into Photoshopped-shadows of their former selves. THEN you release a pretty bad prequel to said classic films. THEN, almost two years later, someone else releases a film in (roughly) the same genre as yours that (to borrow a current military phrases) "Shock-&-Awes" the world something fierce. THEN you release your "big action followup" to much-maligned prequel, only to be overshadowed by the even BIGGER action followup of your rival.

Oh, for a final bonus step to just make thing worse, you make the "big announcement" that you will refuse to release the good versions of the original films on DVD. Ever.

Thats how it "gets to this point."

 

SW and Star Trek are now largely supported by the fan-base like us and not the general public.

I don't agree. Star Wars STILL has a large general appeal. That's why AOTC grossed a very respectable $300 Million in the US alone. Star Trek Nemesis, on the other hand, only scraped together a pathetic $40 Million (Even less that Star Trek V!), the lowest ever gross for a Trek film. It didn;t even make back its budget, and all the other Trek films were at least slightly profitable. Nemesis performed so badly because it was not supported AT ALL by general audiences, and was not even supported by all of the Star Trek fanbase, simply because it is an astonishingly bad movie.

Star Wars is still pretty much as good as it always was, IMO, whereas Star Trek was taken over by talentless hacks and is but a shadow of its former self. At least Star wars is still in the hands of its creator, and said creator hasn't let me down yet.

And one final thing: Star Wars' general support hasn't really dwindled at all: the fan support has, so it really is the opposite to Star Trek. And AOTC was not the critical disaster some like to make out: it was roughly a 60/40 split, 60% of critics loved ot or at least tolerated it's weaknesses, and 40% didn't like it, and only very few of that 40% hated it outright.

-JDR.

 

Here we go again, the infamous, "Is [flash-in-the pan successful franchise A] the new STAR WARS?" STAR WARS is still the STAR WARS of this generation.

While THE LORD OF THE RINGS is a good franchise and the films are reasonably good adaptations of the books (not definitive by any means, but still enjoyable despite the missteps), it's a franchise that isn't going anywhere. Once the films are finished, that's it. There's no EU, no fan fiction, no television series or cartoon shorts, no fan conventions, nothing. Just the films and the much superior books.

(Of course, there is talk of making THE HOBBIT as a prequel to THE LORD OF THE RINGS, but I'll go on record now to predict that it will be as "disappointing" as some think the STAR WARS prequels are.)

STAR WARS, on the other hand, is a relatively self-sustaining enterprise. Even when it seemed that Lucas would not make any more movies, interest was still strong in the franchise, toy sales were still profitable, and EU books were doing strong business.

It's interesting to note that when people get excited about STAR WARS, there is a fervor and excitement that you simply don't see with other films or franchises. I remember when the Special Editions were relased, it was like a party at the local cinema: costumed freaks, guys pumping the STAR WARS soundtrack through their tricked up sound systems in their cars, TV stations doing live shots and other media events at the theaters, it was really something to see.

What I'm getting at is that the release of a STAR WARS movie is an event, not just the release of a movie. Despite other films taking in slightly higher box office totals in 2002, seeing them was just seeing a movie. Seeing the latest STAR WARS film is always something worth remembering.

And that's why STAR WARS will never die!

 

Well, they could film The Silmarillion. That would be something else.

I completely agree with Durwood otherwise.

 

As some one who isn't abig PT fan, making the sillimarilion is an equally if not worse idea.

I like Jack-D-rippers post, even though I don't agree SW is still at the same quality, I do thinkt he rest of the post is entirely correct. The ST produers were also dumb enough to open nemesis 5 days before TTT, very stupid on their part.

"Well, first you re-edit classic films into Photoshopped-shadows of their former selves. THEN you release a pretty bad prequel to said classic films. THEN, almost two years later, someone else releases a film in (roughly) the same genre as yours that (to borrow a current military phrases) "Shock-&-Awes" the world something fierce. THEN you release your "big action followup" to much-maligned prequel, only to be overshadowed by the even BIGGER action followup of your rival.

Oh, for a final bonus step to just make thing worse, you make the "big announcement" that you will refuse to release the good versions of the original films on DVD. Ever.

Thats how it "gets to this point.""

I like this post also.

 

Durwood offered:
>>Here we go again, the infamous, "Is [flash-in-the pan successful franchise A] the new STAR WARS?" STAR WARS is still the STAR WARS of this generation.<<

Agreement on the 2nd part. However, I'd be hesitant to call the subject at hand a "flash-in-the-pan." ID4 was a flash-in-the-pan. MIB was a flash-in-the-pan. This... this is something else. There's an energy about it, a "disturbance in the Force" to borrow an on-topic term. (a DISTINCT disturbance, as opposed to the "evil-incarnate-is-walking-around-down-the-hall-dressed-all-in-black-sneering-and-generally-being-really-obvious-about-it-but-you-don't-see-it-because-we-need-to-mark-two-more-prequel's-worth-of-time-in-between-CGI-matte-shots" minor disturbance.) This is something "more." Something is happening to this industry and genre the likes of which have not been seen since, well... 1977.

>>Once the films are finished, that's it. There's no EU, no fan fiction, no television series or cartoon shorts, no fan conventions, nothing. Just the films and the much superior books.<<

I'll agree on the point that, yes, in LOTR's case we will see FAR less cheap dissection and squeezing-the-last-drop-of-life style of post-film exploitation than is usually seen from sf/f franchises like "Star Wars," "Star Trek," "Highlander," etc.

Wow. Geez, THAT'S a shame. No cheesy EU books for LOTR. What WILL people DO!!?? Damn, next thing you'll be telling me there's no chance for a Prequel series to pop up and screw things up. Man, I'm so DEPRESSED now

Now, as for fan fiction and conventions, well... those ALREADY EXISTED a good, oh.. 30-or-so years before the films even popped up.

>>I remember when the Special Editions were relased, it was like a party at the local cinema: costumed freaks, guys pumping the STAR WARS soundtrack through their tricked up sound systems in their cars, TV stations doing live shots and other media events at the theaters, it was really something to see.<<

Yeah, I remember that. That was DAMN cool. Too bad about the films, though...

>>What I'm getting at is that the release of a STAR WARS movie is an event, not just the release of a movie.<<

Six years ago (has it really been so long?) I would've been in full agreement with you. But all that ended not long ago, cut down in the giggle of a single Gungan.

...

Ahem. And, of course, all that IMO. So those of you readying the deluge of "Stop presenting opinion as fact!!!" posting can conserve your energy for better fodder than me.

 

At the time Star Wars was unleashed upon the world, the "geek world" was much, much smaller than it is today. Science fiction was more of a back alley interest. The lion's share of films were adult dramas and comedies. All press related to geek stuff was underground, and the appetite for it was sated on arrive-and-vanish TV series and drive-in movies. A New Hope was a huge hit with the multitudes, not only the geeks, who could not have driven it into the hundreds of millions of dollars if they had gone twenty times each (which, of course, some of them did).

Twenty five years later we have going on three generations of film goers who were raised in the post-SW era. "Geek stuff" and youth-marketing dominates the culture, and with each passing couple of years it gets more derivative and pale (as always happens; there has been a western cycle, a cop/detective cycle, etc.) What's different about this cycle is that it's happening to coincide with an unprecedented marketing and media-PR surge. The diet of this stuff is so constant and so unapologetic that I truly believe the impact of films on the average movie-goer's psyche is increasingly impossible to quantify.

LOTR is a fine example. The book is seminal and always will be. But though Jackson and Co. have crafted a fine cinematic experience from the books (say most; I'll grudgingly concede the point) LOTR is not a cinema landmark. Fans can rave about it all they want, but its place in history is marginal at best. Even a Best Picture nod wouldn't convince me of its future (certainly I don't think Gladiator's going to haunt the psyches of future film generations).

In today's world, 300 million is exceptional, but nowhere near landmark. It merely means you're drawing the entire geek base, a good chunk of the youth base, and mixing it with some mass appeal. Clones did this (it had the opportunity to do more but didn't) and other films approach this mark regularly (Potter, Signs, what have you). Only two films really went through the domestic roof in recent years: Titanic (somebody explain it to me!) and Menace. They both struck nerves and reaped in profits that in the 70s would've equalled The Godfather and A New Hope. But whereas those earlier films are legitimate landmarks, I believe Menace to have been driven by nostalgia and hype, and Titanic to be that old Hollywood head-scratcher, the "non-recurring phenomenon." But the secrets of their successes doesn't really matter: they drew next to everybody.

Drawing everybody means you'll probably penetrate the consciousness, whether for good or for bad. Sit-com jokes are now made about "The boat going down" or something being as "misconceived as Jar-Jar" and they may well be for a number of years (but I have my doubts they'll go many decades into the future; I think the stream is just that constant). As for LOTR, I think you might catch a joke, for example, about Will's short new lover being "a Frodo" on Will And Grace, but inside of five years that joke will definitely be on its way to the graveyard. Fifteen years from now you'll still be able to crack a "Mr. Spock" or "Darth Vader" joke.

More-->

 

-->


As for Clones and the prequels? Well, certainly their penetration is declining. At best they're noted for things other than the memorable characters or situations that distinguished their predecessors (Jar Jar will be infamous as an Edsel--unfairly, I think--and Lucas and his tactics are proving more notable than the story he's telling). I wouldn't liken the prequels to the utter immasculation and saturation effect that sunk the Star Trek franchise, but while the next huge thing might come from sci-fi/fantasy (I doubt it), it wont come from sci-fi/fantasy film. The most notable social impacts lately have been from television (X-Files, Buffy), which gets years to impose itself on the viewers. And there's been one social phenomenon from books (Potter).

I don't think you can look for the next Star Wars this way. I don't think you can or should look for it at all, cause you're not gonna see it coming.

The sure way you know its happened, though, is if you spend the next twenty years watching knock offs and listening to pop culture references from it.

 

LOTR is a fine example. The book is seminal and always will be. But though Jackson and Co. have crafted a fine cinematic experience from the books (say most; I'll grudgingly concede the point) LOTR is not a cinema landmark. Fans can rave about it all they want, but its place in history is marginal at best. Even a Best Picture nod wouldn't convince me of its future (certainly I don't think Gladiator's going to haunt the psyches of future film generations).

Agreed. I try not to bring this up too often because I've gotten flamed like hell every time... but doesn't the success of Spider-Man show that, from a certain point of view, LOTR is a domestic failure??? We're talking about 2 known brands that have been around for decades and decades, and LOTR couldn't muster up $400mil from being the most popular books of the century!

I love LOTR, but it's had less cultural impact than Matrix, Forrest Gump, Jaws, etc. so I'm not giving it "the torch." It isn't anything compared to what the OT did culturally, and just wait until the OT is released on DVD...

 

However, I'd be hesitant to call the subject at hand a "flash-in-the-pan." ID4 was a flash-in-the-pan. MIB was a flash-in-the-pan. This... this is something else. There's an energy about it, a "disturbance in the Force" to borrow an on-topic term.

I agree to a point, but the problem is, too many critics and fickle movie goers are fanning the flames. This could easily lead to a premature burn-out of the franchise. Once RETURN OF THE KING has come and gone, I have a feeling that it will be forgotten, discarded to make way for the next Big Thing. There is just nothing to sustain the films past their theatrical releases. There's really no community for fans to take a part in, at least not like we STAR WARS fans enjoy.

This is something "more." Something is happening to this industry and genre the likes of which have not been seen since, well... 1977.

I think you're overstating things a bit. The RINGS films are good, but they're not that good.

Wow. Geez, THAT'S a shame. No cheesy EU books for LOTR.

I only concede that they exist and that some fans enjoy them. More I will not say.

Six years ago (has it really been so long?) I would've been in full agreement with you. But all that ended not long ago, cut down in the giggle of a single Gungan.

Whatever. Over $300 million at the domestic box office for latest film and an almost 11 month theatrical run (including Imax) says you're wrong. It says you're dead wrong.

 

LOTR has been regarded as a literary classic for several DECADES. A great version of the books was always going to do well, Jackson deserves a lot of credit.

SW hasn't been around anywhere near as long as LOTR. But comparing it to the way the ST franchise is going just doesn't hold up.

 

R2-12 said:
>>But though Jackson and Co. have crafted a fine cinematic experience from the books (say most; I'll grudgingly concede the point) LOTR is not a cinema landmark.<<

Y'see, this is where I have to disagree. Though I'm not one much for predicting the future, I would be comfortable betting money that LOTR will go down as a landmark of film. Not so much on the strength of it's boxoffice or merchandising but on the strength of being THAT GOOD of a film.

This isn't the place to review the film, but suffice to say I feel that in LOTR what we have for the first time in EONS a film that actually works at being equal-parts "fantastic" action epic and serious, character-oriented drama. Here we have an "action" film over 2 1/2 hours in length where the majority of screentime is actually devoted to character moments, dialogue, conversation and lingering closeups of actor's faces. I think what has truly happened is the first-ever TRUE merging of the previously ever-opposed "superpower" forces in modern Western cinema: the epic-adventure and the small character study. I would imagine, at best, that one day scholars will look back and say that LOTR's legacy was erasing the "lines" between movie-types (the same way the books shattered the boundary of mythological-fantasy and historical-epic); that it was the movie that proved that action films didn't NEED to be dumb, and that smart didn't NEED to mean "small."

Durwood mentioned:
>>There's really no community for fans to take a part in, at least not like we STAR WARS fans enjoy.<<

I'm not trying to bust chops, man, but seriously... look into it. Do a google search. Visit a rennaissance faire. Not only is this "community to take part it" already around, it's already ENORMOUS.

 

I think no-one needs to bash LOTR to disprove a 'SW becoming ST' theory.

Although I think you're overstating LOTR's case a little too much, GeekBob. It's not the first action film to be intelligent, you know But that's fine, you're a fan, so I can understand your enthusiasm. I enjoyed both LOTR films (FOTR more) a lot too, even if they still can't touch SW for me.

 

This is all really a moot argument since only time will be able to answer the questions. But to be honest, I think the impact of the RINGS films is phony and forced, at least for now.

Don't get me wrong, they're good films, and I enjoy them quite a bit actually , but the critics are trying to push RINGS up the ladder as quickly as possible to sit beside the original STAR WARS movie, but you can't force cultural impact. You either have it or you don't. STAR WARS is such a phenomnom because it has staying power despite what the critics have said. The media has tried to bury STAR WARS many times over the decades, but it just won't go away and is in fact as popular as ever.

Personally, I think Peter Jackson's THE LORD OF THE RINGS will be remembered as the first competent retelling of J.R.R. Tolkien's THE LORD OF THE RINGS and it will certainly have a place in cinema history because of that, and it may even get a nod for revitalizing the fantasy genre (we'll see if any more high concept fantasy films get made after THE RETURN OF THE KING), but as far as impact on cultural, the books deserve most if not all the credit for whatever impact there is, and I think the films themselves, while successful, won't have the long lasting cultural impact that STAR WARS has.

I suppose the day that "My precious" becomes a catch phrase on par with "May the force be with you" then we'll know the truth.

 

Don't judge everything by "catchphrases". Lawrence of Arabia is a milestone of cinema yet it hasn't got any catchphrases and people never went to the cinema dressed as Lawrence or Sharif Ali. I also don't know anybody who dresses up as Don Corleone despite The Godfather's massive cultural impact (however that film created some catchphrases).
Critics love LOTR (the films that is, the book was never a huge critical success ironically) because they think they're great films. Critics don't judge films by the amount of people that quote the film.
In my eyes there's little doubt that the release of the Rings films has hurt Star Wars and its reputation (by how much is debatable). AOTC was clearly in the shadow of LOTR over the past year in the public's mind. Of course we don't know what future generations will think of Star Wars or Lord of the Rings. Films that seem cutting edge at their release often look very dated after a few years (I recently watched Temple of Doom on TV. Mygod is that film dated!!! And it seemed so cool when it came out). It might well be that the release of the PT has hurt Star Wars as a whole. A friend of mine one said that until 1999 ROTJ was a mediocre film in a great trilogy. Now he thinks that ANH and ESB are good films in a mediocre series.

 

Star Wars was realsed in 1977. 25+ years later is still the second grossing film of all time, even taking inflate as considaration. Today, SW still stands as the greatest Sci-Fi epic of all time. Movies, books, comics , games etc are created to satisfy the multitude of SW fans all around the world.
I hardly bealive that LOTR will have that impact. Wait a couple of years after Return of the King is realesed. SW fans will still be there enyoing new products, while the LOTR fans will still be reading 1950's books and watching the extended versions again and again.

 

Don't judge everything by "catchphrases". Lawrence of Arabia is a milestone of cinema yet it hasn't got any catchphrases and people never went to the cinema dressed as Lawrence or Sharif Ali.

We're not talking about simple milestones but the overwhelming cultural impact that STAR WARS has had as opposed to Peter Jackson's THE LORD OF THE RINGS. STAR WARS is a milestone of cinema and has enjoyed considerable cultural impact.

I agree that there are many films that are argurably more important to the history of film than STAR WARS, but few have had the same wide ranging impact.

 

Star Wars will always be on top. I mean, pretty much everyone has seen at least one Star Wars film.

Some people know what "I am your father" is all about even though they've never seen The Empire Strikes Back.

People who haven't seen the movies still know who Yoda or Darth Vader is.

Ask the average person who Aragorn or Boromir is, and they'll give you a "what the hell?" look.

 

A lot of what different people percieve about films really comes down to their expectations at the time they see the film. And opinions change over time. I know that if I were, say, still in the mindset I was in ten years ago, I would have HATED the Prequel Star Wars trilogy a lot. That's because ten years ago I was a rather insecure, depressed kid that thought the world owed him something. Lately, I've become a far more relaxed sci-fi geek, and it takes quite a lot to actually piss me off these days, which is why the SW Prequels, really, are just fine with me. They still entertain me, whereas Star Trek stopped entertaining me some time ago, and I really can't stand the later crud they crank out. (But it sure as hell didn't actually piss me off: it's not worth the effort, and being pissed off isn't magically going to make it get better again.)

Here is my reasoning behind why, barring some really terrible lapse in quality, I will continue to enjoy Star Wars.

Nothing could really hope to repeat the Original Trilogy's brilliance. The time it was made in, the available technology, and whatever it was that influenced the story to turn out the way it did, all came together in a unique way, to shape the OT into what we came to love. Now, because those circumstances CANNOT be recreated, its fairly obvious why the PT is different, why it is judged differently, and why people carrying with them memories of that time in their lives, don't all like the PT. (Not the ONLY reason, mind you, but surely an influence). When the PT first became a reality, thoughts along the lines of what I've just posted were foremost on my mind. I just didn't think I could POSSIBLY like them given the fact that they were being made without the 1970's and all the rest of the OT's unique circumstances, as part of the equation. But, what do you know? I DID like TPM. I DID like AOTC. Because TPM actually wasn't the let down I had been anticipating for five solid years, and was actually pretty good in its own right, I took that as being a bonus. Free enjoyment, if you will. "Excellent!" I thought. "I don't have to be miserable and disappointed for the rest of my life!" And I just don't believe in looking gift horses in the mouth. If someone handed me the keys to a Rolls Royce, I wouldn't turn the offer down because there was a spot of mud on the fender....

-JDR.

 

After ROTK comes out, LOTR is finished.
But, we still have Episode three, the OT DVDs, plenty of new products, and countless video games and books to look forward to. I almost think Lucas planned it that way. (about the OT DVDs.)