JJ Abrams Star Trek continues to build steam in its quest for award season glory. Today the prestigious National Board of Review of Motion Pictures named its top 11 films of the year and Star Trek is on the list. Plus Google reports that Star Trek is named one of the top movie searches of they year.
Star Trek makes NBR Top 10
Today the NBR issued its list of National Board of Review Awards for 2009. For the Best Movie category here is the full list (via Variety)
Best Picture Up in the Air
Top 10 Films (alphabetical order)
(500) Days of Summer
The Hurt Locker
A Serious Man
Where the Wild Things Are
Variety also has the full list of other NBR award winners.
The NBR have been listing the top films for 80 years and this is the first time a Star Trek movie has made the cut. In fact, it is very rare for a science fiction film to be listed. Past sci-fi films honored by the board were 2001: A Space Odyssey, Star Wars, and E.T.. But other sci-fi classics like Blade Runner and Alien didn’t make the list. Variety notes that because the awards are announced so early, the board’s top 10 lists are often cited in awards campaigns. As we reported earlier this week, Paramount has already identified Star Trek as one of the four movies they are pitching in their "for your consideration" awards campaign.
The NBR listing is just the latest piece of good buzz for JJ Abrams movie. The film remains one of the best reviewed films of the year, with a Rotten Tomatoes score of 92% from the ‘Top Critics’. With the Academy’s expansion of the Best Picture category to 10 films, the NBR list is a big boost in the hopes that Star Trek will be one of them. One of the next tests will be to track how many critics put Star Trek onto their top 10 lists for the year.
Star Trek in the Google Zeitgeist
This week Star Trek also was one of the films listed in Google’s annual "Zeitgest" listings of top searches for the year. Star Trek was the 5th most searched movie trailer, here is the full list via Google Zeitgest
- new moon
- transformers 2
- star trek
- gi joe
- paranormal activity
here’s the ones that really matter! hahah!
If all this data is to be believed then Star Trek is more popular now than when there was always another Trek movie being made AND up to two Trek shows were on the air.
Am I the only one who finds that hard do believe?
#1: Matter…….. Red Matter
I don’t know if you are the only one, but I do not find ST’s popularity hard to believe at all. Just because Paramount was popping out shows doesn’t make Star Trek automatically popular. In fact, Paramount was riding ST into oblivion. Nemesis being in production was not a sign of good things… And while I love all ST shows, VOY and ENT were not responding to true demand. Which was finally shown by ENT’s cancellation.
Today, there are more creative forces behind ST, with higher budget, broader appeal and fresher cast and without oversaturation. I find it very easy to believe that ST (the movie) is more popular than any other ST incarnation.
P.S. I am not sure that means ST the franchise is more popular… That can be told by DVD sales of old ST shows, games and merchandise. I don’t know what those look like. I am sure they picked up, but probably not to any crazy levels.
2. Back then they didn´t have the most searched for movie trailers because there was no internet.
I don’t think you can correlate it quite so easily. Internet use behaviors have changed drastically in the last few years, with smartphones, social networking sites, and JJ Abrams…
Out of both lists… I’ve seen 4 movies.
Inglorious Basterds??? Um….
I’ve seen 7 so far.
I think this story is too political. GRIN
It is hard to measure popularity vs. the nineties when Star Trek had two TV shows and a movie. The new Star Trek certainly sold more tickets than the nineties movies.
Just for fun I did a ‘Star Trek in the zeitgest’ comparison of how the the term “star trek” compares to “god’ and “lady gaga”
it came in last…so there is still work to do
It may seem hard to believe, but Star Trek stands an outside chance of being nominated for best film at the Oscars this year.
ST is exactly the type of critically acclaimed blockbuster that the Academy was hoping for when they expanded the best film field from five to ten. They want to boost the Oscar’s ratings and ST is exactly the type of film that could do that.
When you look at the list of films that could be nominated Star Trek is going to be VERY close to making the list.
I TOLD you ST2009 was and is a GREAT film! :-)
Now that a prestigious film review board has given it a stamp of approval, it would be horrible if the Academy were to overlook at least nominating ST2009 for Best Picture — and JJ Abrams as Best Director.
Anything that shows that Star Trek is popular can only help improve the chances of future Star Trek movies and T.V. shows. Cool!
What does God need with a Zeitgeist google comparison? ;)
Seriously though, I find it hard to believe that the new Trek is more popular than TNG/DS9 were in their heyday. But maybe I am just being a snob and the unwashed masses actually think it IS more popular now.
Either way: more Trek please. And yes, that includes a TV show (only if done right though)
DS9 and Voyager were not that popular when they first came out. They pretty much killed convention interest, and that’s why Creation started looking at other shows, and stuff.
14 – “Either way: more Trek please. And yes, that includes a TV show (only if done right though)”
I too would like a show but I wonder if it would dilute the impact of the movies. If the public would tire of the show thus tire of the (potential future) movies?
Again ‘popularity’ is hard to judge. At its peak in 1993 TNG had about 14.75 million viewers. The biggest movie in the nineties sold about 21 million tickets. The new Star Trek movie sold about 34 million tickets, beating the record of TMP. (all domestic numbers)
Star Trek is certainly back in the mainstream zeitgest in a big way, that can be seen from the accolades, the comparisons of the president, other references in popular culture, etc.
However, I would say that in the 90s, Star Trek had more hard core fans. Back then the franchise supported two shows, and enough of a core to support even more product and dozens of conventions each year.
I wish we were living in that age, this site would get even more traffic! (if the web was as ubiquitous as it is now)
The popularity seems broader to me with ST09, Iwhen the dvd release happened a few weeks back, I actually heard radio DJ’s (both male and female) saying they were looking forward to seeing it again, many claiming it was their favourite film of the summer. Then seeing it in the number 1 spot for rental and purchase.
Cant remember when last a trek film got so much praise and attention from the mainstream, I grew up on TNG, DS9 & VOY, but its repeated to hell on tv, I really think that DVD negates the need for so much trek on tv, fine for a few (to catch new generations) but it feels like its too much. . . The 90’s were the boom time, but over saturation thinned the demand.
JJ & Co have injected life into Trek, and it has come at the cost of hearing and seeing it be warmly met by general moviegoers, great price to pay IMHO.
There was more interest than that.
Anyone who really wanted to keep track of Trek bookmarked this site, and bypassed Google.
(Now, what good can come from kissing up to Anthony like this???)
Here in NYC, I showed up at the pre-midnight show the day before release, the the media were out in full force (ABC News, local stations). I think here in the States, the anticipation due to the trailers, and due to the fact that we are looking at young virile Kirk and Spock in an energetic new film which not only doesn’t suck, but is really good, drew people in in droves.
It’s a great story with non-stop action, decent character plays, and Nimoy as Spock Prime, who is still an icon of the ’60s and ’70s, acting his heart out.
Looking at that list, ST09 sure seems like an odd inclusion (No T4, no Transformers 2, Wolverine or Harry Potter), but we should assume that NBR has seen all these films, and that Trek has risen above the pack. Congrats to all.
Clint Eastwood (or whichever big shot) comes on stage to present the best pic
opens the envelope…’and…..the award….for best picture….goes to….Star Trek………………V The Final Frontier!!’…..band starts playing TOS theme….black tie shatner takes the stage to mass applause already holding his best director statue (awarded to him by Costner) …takes the award from eastwood…and proudly holds both oscars in each hand
its 1990 and shatner is king of the world….
shatner wakes up in his bel air bedroom circa 2010…Zero hour nine a.m.
…..sighs….another dream….life that could have been… and wasn’t……life is but a dream…
he goes to the window and watches the morning rain sliding gently against the window….
tears he couldnt shed
To me Star Trek was to Bland for the usualy fan of Movies in the 90s. I loved all the Trek Films and seen them many many times. But the regular Movie going People were not interested. Take Trek 10 for example. nemisis was doinf things that everyone has seen before. Clones. That has already been done and trek 10 did not do it that well. Do not get me wrong. it had it’s great Moments. Byt the Regular Fans just werent buying into it. Now here comes Star Trek 09 with the Hottest Director and writers in Holloywood. J.J and the Court. The Spruced it up. Went back to the roots and made something old seem new again with Nimoy himself coming out of Retirement. Made it more fast pased and much better Fx and much better writing. Not perfect but much better. Now the Regular moie goingpeople lovbe it. The critics love it. I love it. Most hard corce trek fans love it. As do I and im a very hard core trek Fan. heres to the next Trek Movie.
Sorry. I did not proof read that. Ok. Back to the Agoniser booth for me.
You would have to be the only one who finds that hard to believe. The whole point of this film is that it has vastly expanded the fan base.
The film took far more at the box office than any previous trek film. That alone should give you an idea.
Closing the other thread to prevent further comments. Very in spirit of Trek, haha!
Long time ago, I asked Bob Orci why didn’t they make this movie with a new crew, because I think the audience doesn’t care if the characters were named Jerk and McGurk, and that the movie itself, with its fast pace and action and the good-looking trailers were the key.
And the reply was:
271. Boborci – August 17, 2009
You still of the NEXT NEXT NEXT generation? Do you really think the New York Times and Newsweek would’ve given us the free press they did and compared our current President to your Doctor MGurk or Captain Jerk, instead of Spock?
It was all coldly calculated, from day one. And because the bluray was just released, they are again warming up the Spock/Obama parallel again. Wonderful how the business works.
“Free press”. Ha! I wouldn’t be surprised if Paramount actually asked AP to interview Orci and Nimoy about that.
AJ… “Looking at that list, ST09 sure seems like an odd inclusion (No T4, no Transformers 2, Wolverine or Harry Potter),”
Not odd at all. “Wolverine” stunk. “Terminator 4” was a mess, and “Harry Potter And The Studio Timekiller” was the weakest entry in the movie series so far. “Transformers 2” will get a non-effects Oscar nomination sometime shortly after Hades experiences its first freeze. Among summer movies to get the Best Picture nomination, it really is just “Star Trek” or “Up”, but “Up” will get the Best Animated Feature, so Trek is the frontrunner.
Well, they lobbied the movie well enough. It will definately win the oscar for best picture.
25. ger – December 3, 2009
You got me!
The press is my plaything, and I manipulate it to my will!
Or maybe my point was that people still did and do care about Kirk and Spock and McCoy as cultural icons.
Point taken. It’s just that we’re all used to lumping Trek in with all the other genre films. ST09 definitely deserves to be the genre standard-bearer amongst films of all types. It is a good film, Period.
#28. Hey Bob. You guys did a great job on Trek. From the first letter in writting the Movie to the Adds and promoting it. So on this Trek for the Awards and the next Trek Movie. DO WHAT EVER YOU NEED TO DO!!!. When ever I get on Yahoo and others Ill always put Trek up above all the others.
yessir bob u guys were right on-tos characters were more original and iconic and their relationships and family closeness was only copied not quite as well as the originals in the other incarnations–the original is the core of all trek–much as i luved tng etc…the original was the zeitgeist and any other overused buzzword u can think of `
They didn’t make a movie with another cast of characters for the simple reason that nobody would have cared.
Maybe you missed Star Trek’s 15 year slide into irrelevency, but by the time the last episode of “Enterprise” aired some local wrestling cable access programs were getting better ratings and “Nemesis” was a total disaster at the box office… Roger Ebert said it best when he said ” Star Trek was kind of terrific once, but now it is a copy of a copy of a copy”…The public only cared about the real thing.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why they went back to Kirk, Spock + McCoy. Those characters are cultural icons the same way that James Bond and Indiana Jones are.
They brought back Kirk and Spock (plus Leonard Nimoy to add some old school credibility) in an extremely entertaining film and all of a sudden ST is relevant again…It was a pretty obvious choice to make.
As a ST fan why would you be upset that the film was a major hit that essentially saved the franchise?
Totally uncalled for.
Top 10? There’s the last sign of the apocalypse!
I think this is fantastic. I will no longer equate NBR with a bunch of stuffy old people.
They’re cool now.
Come on Academy, don’t you want to be cool, too?
and I for one am glad that a well executed and entirely entertaining movie has placed Trek back in the cultural zeitgeist. As a lifelong Trekker, I’m quite happy that other people finally get to see it in a way they can understand… I think now they understand me a little better.
well Bruno is only on the top list of Google searches.
what i find most interesting is that Star Trek is the only film on BOTH lists. Showing it was able to appeal to the masses and the ‘critic elites’
The only other top 10 box office movie that is also a top 10 critics movie is Up, and maybe The Hangover to a lesser extend.
On the list of the ten best films, I have seen ‘Star Trek’ (naturally) and ‘Up.’
Not one of the other films remotely interests me.
What I find interesting and disturbing at the same time is that neither ‘Transformers 2’ or ‘GI Joe’ made the top ten list for award consideration.
I kill myself sometimes (I’m sorry Mr. Orci for the slam… I did like both films for what they were, just for the record).
I do predict that ‘Star Trek’ will take a number of awards, but am dubious that it can take the best film (wish that I may) award. *fingers crossed*
That said, I would feel better about ST09 winning if it hadn’t changed two important longstanding elements (the death of Vulcan and Amanda).
Mr. Orci, I do have a question if you are here by chance. Why did you guys change Birk’s brother George Kirk, Jr.’s name to Johnny?
#38: oops… that should have said Kirk’s… not Birk’s… damn fumble fingers.
#32: “Roger Ebert said it best when he said ” Star Trek was kind of terrific once, but now it is a copy of a copy of a copy”
He also nailed it when he wrote “But the franchise has become much of a muchness. The new movie essentially intends to reboot the franchise with younger characters and carry on as before.”
As a copy, of a copy, of a copy, of a copy, of a copy, of a copy …
#37. You should give more films a try. Of the list, I’ve seen (500) Days of Summer, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, A Serious Man, Star Trek, Up, Where the Wild Things Are.
All of them I loved (except A Serious Man which I didn’t get into). The thing I liked is that I loved all of these movies for different reasons.
It is inevitable that Star Trek would be rebooted- but I disagree with the copy of a copy analogy. Look at 007 Bond for instance. THAT is a copy of a copy of a copy. The same character, but every so often Bond is played by someone new.
In Star Trek, our beloved Shat and Nimoy are IRL getting older. To be in the movies, sure! But one day, they will have to leave this world like the rest of us. Then what??? No more Kirk and Spock and crew? This had to happen to ensure the survival of Star Trek. Breath has been instilled into this new movie- and we are the first in forty years to see HOW Kirk and Spock met as well as the other crew members. How cool is that??
And that is what makes it original.
#41: Yeah, yeah I know, but I don’t go to movies very often and almost never unless they are genre films.
This year I have seen ‘TREK, Up, Terminator – Salvation, New Moon (Twilight), Harry Potter’ and I plan to see ‘Avatar.’
Seeing that number of films in one year has to be a record for me.
(also saw ‘Wolverine’ and ‘Proposal’ but not until they hit DVD) I wanted to see ‘District 9’ but just never got around to it.
But back to the list… nothing on it interests me in the least.
Pretty impresive company among the NBR list!
S.John Ross #40
I don’t remember that quote from Ebert in reference to the new film, but I’ll take your word for it.
quote – “He also nailed it when he wrote “But the franchise has become much of a muchness. The new movie essentially intends to reboot the franchise with younger characters and carry on as before.”
Ebert’s statement is essentially correct, but that was the intention of the film. Get back to basics (Kirk,Spock McCoy) and then “carry on as before”
His copy, of a copy, of a copy statement was alluding to the fact that the series had unintentionally become creatively stagnant in a vain attempt to recreate both the commercial and critical appeal (failed on both fronts) of the original Star Trek and it’s iconic characters.
A clear distinction must be made… Abrams ST accomplished it’s goals by intentionally returning to source material and characters that made the series great. While most of the spinoffs failed because they were simply pale “copies” of the original.
P.S. I am a big fan of Roger Ebert, but I think he missed the boat on “Star Trek” he was one of the few major U.S. critics who gave the film a lukewarm review.
Bob, if you are still reading this. Here are a few things I’d like you to tackle in the next SEVERAL fillms. And I say several because I know “Star Trek: Something Something” will be even better and more lucrative than the first because of your unquestionable talent and love for all things “Star Trek”. Anyway, here are my suggestions:
Khan and the Klingons. There is a history between the Klingons and the genetically engineered “relatives” of Khan. Just watch “Enterprise Season 4” for more.
William Shatner. I know it would be hard to get him in the movie without time travel, but as I said earlier, I have confidence in you guys.
Tholians, Gorn, and Andorians. The Andorians are always cool, and the Gorn and Tholians have only been done a couple of times.
The Borg. It can work. The Narada featured Borg technology and perhaps the Borg were in the Beta Quadrant and end up invading Federation space 100+years earlier than expected. And besides, all the other main captains faced the Borg, so why not Captain Kirk?
As for comparing Star Trek’s current popularity to the mid 90’s, I have to agree with Anthony. TNG brought in new viewers and fans due to the fact a lot of people (myself included) were not even born during the original run of The Original Series. Deep Space Nine had solid ratings (though not as high as TNG’s were) but it was mainly the hardcore fans supporting it and Voyager. After Deep Space Nine went off the air, ratings plummeted further. Despite the attempt to bring “realism’ to Trek with the launch of “Enterprise”, ratings continued to drop until the show got canned. As for the TNG films, First Contact was the most successful of the bunch and perhaps would have made more money if there hadn’t been two shows on the air at the time. As for Insurrection, that movie was the turning point in TNG’s demise and the beginning of over-saturation taking it’s toll on the fanbase and the franchise. Now the “Star Trek’ brand is successful again. Unfortuneately though, there is still some work to do specifically with new fans in North America and moviegoers in general overseas. The success of the new movie was based mostly on fans who supported at least some of the movies and shows. Many of these fans came back after many years. There is no doubt that new fans were created by this new film, but most of the repeat customers were probably at least semi-hardcore fans. I do believe now that the new film is on DVD/ Blu Ray, even more people will become fans just like us. This will not only be good for how the next film will perform in North America, but also internationally. And the added benefit will be people who weren’t fans before could end up becoming fans of “Old Star Trek” as well.
As for Star Trek returning to the small screen, don’t hold your breath. The T.V landscape has changed dramaticlly since the TNG era. First of all, people have the options of TIVO and the internet. This means that people will watch the show at their convience,and thus cutting into Nielsen ratings. Secondly, sci-fi in general is risky business for many networks who have to worry about sponsors. Sponsors will pay much more for a spot during a show such as CSI or Grey’s Anatomy.
And thirdly, apart fom Battlestar Galactica, most non-sci-fi viewers find sci-fi unwelcoming. There is still the stigma of T.V sci-fi being a “geeks only” club. And finally, the cost of producing a high quality Star Trek T.V show would be quite expensive. The show would be given only a handful of episodes to prove itself, and even that would require a stroke of luck.
Unfortuneately, with the economy still in recession, a new show would be just too much of a gamble. CBS would more likely to put a new CSI spinoff on the air, rather than take a chance on a t.v show that wouldn’t come close to getting a quarter of the number of viewers that CSI gets.
Therefore it would be wiser to wait another few years and to let the next sequel or two to bring in more fans before considering a new show. T.V economics are just too unpredictable right now. Of course, I have never worked in the T.V industry nor do I know much about it, but I do know it’s about numbers. Numbers such as dollars and cents as well as ratings.
#25 ger: You’ve won my award for Most Insane Conspiracy Theory of the Month. And that’s *really* hard to do. I mean, between the birthers and the vast right-wing conspiracy and that one guy who keeps insisting that ST09 did not necessarily spin off a new universe, but can be reconciled with the old one while keeping the original and known history (disclaimer: that one guy is actually me), it takes a lot to come up with something *so* insane as “the entire Star Trek movie was conceived and implemented two years before the election as an enormous Obama puff piece designed to save his falling approval ratings during the first term”! That’s… well, like I said, that’s the Most Insane Conspiracy Theory of the Month. Congratulations! Your check is in the mail! If you don’t receive it, no doubt it was snagged by Illuminati Masons from the center of the Earth!
On-topic: OSCAR TIME, GUYS!
48, your TV show comments sound quite reasonable. I think it would be nice to consider, however, whether a “one-off” TV special based in the Star Trek universe might work on cable — especially an animated one.
Imagine this animated special: “Tales from the Federation” — a story of a roguish former Starfleet officer and his band of friends who, aboard a sleek new starship, fight the battles that Starfleet legally cannot fight. The series would include entirely new characters and take place in the Prime Timeline just before the five-year mission of James T. Kirk. It would be like “Firefly,” except that the characters would be members of a covert, do-good Federation organization — an organization that does not officially exist. For that reason, the team is also pursued by above-board Federation authorities who are unaware that they act through covert sanction.
Characters would include humans, Tellarites, Betazoids, and a being from a new species capable of incredible feats of strength and agility. We could also incorporate characters from TAS in it.
It’d be like Section 31 meets A-Team.
In fact, this organization might very well morph into Section 31 in the future.
It could be distributed on any one of Viacom’s various outlets through a special deal with CBS, or by CBS or its affiliated entities.
That’s a TV special I would watch!