A new article from Forbes is sparking some debate on how much Hollywood studios value franchise fans, including Star Trek fans. The article even caught the interest of Star Trek writer/producer (and soon to be director) Roberto Orci, who was mentioned in it. More below.
Does Hollywood Care About The Fans?
When digital effects became a mainstream filmmaking tool in the early 90’s, it gave filmmakers the ability to stretch their imaginations and envision concepts that would’ve been considered impossible to realize just 10 years earlier. The technical progress that came forth over the ensuing two decades has been a boon for geeks everywhere, who finally got to see live-action, big screen depictions of iconic characters like Spider-Man and X-Men and have even gotten to see projects get made that were once considered unfilmable, like Watchmen. The studios found a whole new source of box office and licensing revenue and now flock to San Diego Comic Con every year to give fans sneak previews of their latest projects and often bring cast members along. All in all, it’s been a good time to be a geek.
But according to Forbes’ Scott Mendelson, geek influence in the movie business has been overstated. Mendelson believes that recent controversies surrounding Edgar Wright’s departure from Ant Man, Drew Goddard’s departure from the Daredevil series, and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman, as well as other controversies, don’t have the influence on studio decision-making that fans would like to think. He also believes their box office importance is exaggerated:
It’s not that Hollywood doesn’t care about or doesn’t appreciate the geek fandom. It’s just that said geek fandom doesn’t make up very much total box office for a given film.
He cites (and it could be said, overgeneralizes) fan reaction to Star Trek Into Darkness and Bob Orci’s appointment as the director of the next Trek film as an example:
The casual moviegoers that propelled Star Trek Into Darkness to $467 million worldwide thought it was an entertaining science-fiction adventure with a fun cast and strong special effects. They didn’t care about the whole “Is Benedict Cumberbatch playing Khan?” controversy or the hamfisted callbacks to Wrath of Khan or the 9/11-truther undertones. It was the hardcore Star Trek fans who took to the Internet to proclaim the film to be the “worst Star Trek film ever.” But Paramount (a division of Viacom, Inc.) knows that most of those ”Trekkies” will still show up for Star Trek 3 in summer 2016 no matter how much they disagree with the choice of Roberto Orci as director.
It isn’t clear what the Forbes writer is using as a source for the claim that Trek fans “disagree” with the choice of Roberto Orci. And it could be argued that Paramount is actually playing to the fans by giving Orci the chair, as he has been the most fan-friendly of all the producers involved in the last two films.
Bob Orci himself took notice of the article tweeted out a link (and posted a comment here at TrekMovie) asking for reactions to this article.
thoughts on this? http://t.co/kqSnFY0apY
— Roberto Orci (@realboborci) June 26, 2014
[NOTE: TrekMovie has verified that ‘@realboborci’ is indeed the real Bob Orci, now under a new Twitter account]
So, what are your thoughts? Is Mendelson right in saying that fans are being taken for granted, or do you think fan opinions carry weight?
Do you think that Paramount cares about Trek fans?
Hollywood rewards fan loyalty by stepping all over us on the way to the bank!
Hollywood is supposed to be a combination of Art meets Commerce.
Too bad Art left town 20 years ago.
As a fanboy himself who’s worked in the fanboy-Hollywood area, I can say that it’s a double-edged sword. Fanboys are the most vocal and can definitely have an impact on public perception, but the actual fanboy numbers themselves are tiny.
Think about Comic-Con’s overall attendance. If you got all 150,000 people to go see a major Hollywood blockbuster, it would have very little impact. That’s why it’s treated as more of a press event than anything else these days.
I have yet to meet a real person that didn’t like Star Trek Into Darkness and saw it. I think if anything whoever doesn’t care about those people knows they are a small fraction of a small fraction. Can’t please everyone. To say that not obeying whatever a small fraction of a small fraction wants is like saying we should have to elect an Amish president because they’re maybe the smallest faction in our country.
Hollywood is right. In the end, fanboys (like me) will go see the movie.
Hollywood needs to cater to a broader audience who may not be fans after all. They need to find elements which may trigger a prospective audience to buy that golden ticket.
Star Trek fanboys are getting older. To some extent, the fans of long time ago are getting fewer and fewer. So Hollywood needs to tap a new younger audience to fill in those seats.
And that’s showbiz, folks.
It’s not about if Hollywood cares about the fans. It’s about Hollywood not caring about films that make sense, that have depth or any originality. Movies that look amazing but fall apart when you think about them are becoming increasingly common in the big blockbuster genre. Star Trek ID was very well made, but it wasn’t very well written.
I’m a bit irritated by the overstatement sometimes made by the less-informed that Trek fans believe that STID is the “worst” movie in the franchise, simply because a vote of — what? a few hundred fans? — was taken at a convention somewhere, once upon a time.
I, for one, have strongly support Abrams’ movies, although I’ve been increasingly frustrated by the lengthy delays associated with them. And, as well, I’ve come to see the biases that I have in favor of such movies, over time. But nevertheless, I’m a fan of the latest movies.
The overall situation is complicated and contextual. There is a sense in which without the fan base, there is no franchise. One could never remake Flash Gordon at this point, because there aren’t enough aficionados of that particular character (notwithstanding that a remake was made as recently as 1980). In a completely different context, no one would ever consider remaking any of Charlie Chaplin’s movies featuring his central character, The Little Tramp, because there’s neither an appeal to it any more, nor a fan base — despite the fact that Chaplin is widely considered a comic genius.
But it is also a truism that the fan base is simply not enough to sustain a big-money production. For that, there are dozens of other factors to be considered.
Let’s look at the Iron Man series of movies. Before the very first such movie, how big was the base of Iron Man devotees? Not very, to say the least. And yet the Iron Man movies, once they were made, turned out to be extremely successful. It was the movies, and the stars, that generated the fan base that in turn made movies even more successful.
There is a feedback loop, therefore, and a virtuous cycle of mutual reinforcement.
Something tells me that, this time, the beancounters are actually right: You can’t depend solely on the fan base. However, without a growing fan base, all the counting in the world, eventually, wouldn’t amount to a hill of said beans. It’s not a zero-sum equation; it’s an evolving process of growth. A fan base may be necessary to the continuation of a franchise, but it is not, in itself sufficient.
They can ignore the fans, but that doesn’t mean the movie has to be crap.
How about making a movie with a GREAT story and THEN add the action scenes to it?
Imagine if the word-of-mouth about a movie was that it had an AMAZING story to it? Real depth with meaning. One for the ages. A classic.
Nah, that makes too much sense!
That would require hiring writers with actual talent.
Good luck finding that in Hollywood.
Studios don’t do it because they can get away with piecing together pure crap with big explosions to distract the audience. Bread and circuses, indeed.
I am a Trek fan. I gave the first JJ movie a shot, but after that mockery no way was I going to see STID.
Really though I don’t think the problem was (only) the Director – the god awful script was painful. The fact Orci was involved with the writing does not bode well, IMO.
While I believe it is important to listen to, appreciate, and give fans their due, I think too much fan input is a detriment. Is so-called fans would have had their complete say in the previous two films, they would have been financial flops.
It is the responsibility of the studio, director, and writers to strike a balance in order to create broader appeal. Fans may not want to admit it, but we rely on the casual moviegoers to support what we love. We need to attract them in order to have more Star Trek. I gladly sacrifice what I believe should be done as a fan versus what appeals to a bigger audience if it means Star Trek stays relevant while being true to what it is at its heart. That is something I believe JJ, Orci, and company have done beautifully for us. It is something more fans should understand and appreciate.
Star Trek Into Darkness is viewed by most people the BEST Star Trek movie. Trekkies and non nerds alike.
The writer of the Forbes article like many writers and critics when writing about the Sci-Fi and or comic book movie culture are neophytes and do not have any real knowledge or experience with this subject.Since this part of our culture is now popular and making money some uneducated in the subject will nevertheless attempt to add their 2 cents in an attempt to shower themselves with popularity and monetary back spray.
@realboborci is *not* Roberto Orci. The description for the account is “An internet character designed for entertainment purposes only. Any similarity to Roberto Orci is part of a conspiracy.”
The real Roberto Orci deleted his twitter account after insulting fans.
“Thoughts on this?”
(As far as Star Trek is concerned), it reminds me of an old article I read while waiting for my DVD of Star Trek (2009) ( a movie I only had the opportunity of watching for the very first time in November of 2009. A good film, from my perspective; I enjoyed it tremendously ) :
“… Trek has been going downhill for the last 10 years and if we expect it to be around 20 years from now we will have to take some bold steps that might be controversial at first but we are sure to bring new fans to the dying franchise”
New fans? what about the old fans?
Although their source is unnamed and not very diplomatic, it is true that Trek needs new fans to remain vital going forward. Abrams built in fanbase should help (as would the fanbase of any ‘star’, like Damon for example). IESB’s ‘source’ elaborated on his views of Trek fandom
“Trek fans were not able to keep the last show (Enterprise) on the air and we are looking on bringing over ‘Alias’ and ‘Lost’ fans and if the old Trekkies like the new movie great, if not too bad. We have to boldly go were no Star Trek has gone before.”
…From the Forbes article :
“…The casual moviegoers that propelled Star Trek Into Darkness to $467 million worldwide thought it was an entertaining science-fiction adventure with a fun cast and strong special effects. They didn’t care about the whole ‘Is Benedict Cumberbatch playing Khan?’…”
Personally, I cared about the fact that an English man portrayed an Indian character, in 2013 in a ( Star Trek ) movie . I still do.
….I know ; as an “unnamed source ” would say ; ” too bad “…
I think if Paramount simply wanted to make money then it would have given Star Trek to Michael Bay back in 2009.
The very thought of that makes me sick.
It’s a tale as old as time that is being misdirected to unnecessarily slam fans.
Look, when Hollywood studios option best selling books to make into movies as they have from the beginning, TARZAN, THE WIZARD OF OZ, GONE WITH THE WIND, THE MASTER OF THE WORLD, THE TIME MACHINE, JAMES BOND, THE PLANET OF THE APES, HARRY POTTER, TWILIGHT, THE HUNGER GAMES, etc. they are lying through their teeth if they claim the reason they are doing it is because they don’t give a damn about the eyeballs that made those works best sellers.
What Hollywood has traditionally ignored is not the fans per se but the originating creators of the tales and their characters themselves. Most of the time in the past the studios have optioned best sellers not out of some altruistic need to realize a great work of art on a broader canvas but for the simple name recognition boost that it gives their marketing efforts and that this right to slap these easily recognized names on a movie could be had for a mere pittance of the amount of money they’d have to spend in a marketing campaign for a movie based on an original script.
If there is any basis for this claim of Hollywood needing to actively ignore fans, it is probably more of backlash because of the consternation studios and productions have at finding out that as the era of greater communications through technology eases our ability to do just that, these authors and creators don’t just write works, but write to each other. And thus, these best selling titles are no longer so easily purchased and they come with provisos such as “script approval”, “casting vetoes”, “director approval”, etc.
So to fight this increasing feeling of creative claustrophobia, traditional Hollywood types feel the need to lash out. But I think that’s all it ultimately is.
Besides, even if there is such a thing as a critical “fan” mass that can be achieved at which point the studios can take them for granted it is very doubtful STAR TREK movies have achieved this.
From STARLOG, July 1982, Issue No. 60:
“[STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE] turned a global
profit of over $175 million.” — Ed Naha, “The Re-Making of Star Trek”, STARLOG, July 1982, Issue No. 60
When that figure is adjusted for inflation, the current films aren’t far outstripping it. They are doing respectable comparable biz, but critical fan ignoring mass???
I don’t know where Bob Orci’s head is on this but I wouldn’t want to build my ticket sales projections believing only those core fans who showed up for NEMESIS and will do so regardless, matter.
Marvel cinematic universe is made for fans. Great success. Iron Man, The Avengers, Capt. America…
Abramverse is made for casual movigoers. Mediocre success.
Marvel cinematic universe is the formula: a extended universe made by fans with talent for fans.
Nu trek universe must die, if Paramount wants to build a extended trek universe , they need the original timeline. The original thing is the best. If Paramount wants a extended trek universe, they will reboot this poor and badly made nu trek. Stid was a piece of garbage made for casual movigoers and it lost money in America…
Abrams said you cannot earn money with movies made for fans….hahaha, and he is shooting a star wars movie made for fans. And you know what, Abrams? The Avengers….
Oh, true he despised star trek, this is the why he did not want to shoot a trek movie for fans…
Star Trek needs a Josh Whedon, a Singer, with Orci you can have stupid nu trek movies, Crash trek movies, GIJOE trek movies, but you will never have a true STAR TREK movie.
The more I reflex on the movies, the more I see the gaping holes and disappointments – and I still want to watch them again and look forward to the next installment.
Yes, the reboot lacks the depth, emotion, and thoughtfulness of the original. They are still fun and deliver a shot of excitement to space exploration and science fiction. Cosmos brought physics and science to the masses. I hope that the Star Trek movies can continue to balance the needs and wants of long time fans while pulling in new ones.
I think in todays times, movie making could and should be done differently.
We live in times of crowdfunding, open sourcing, crowdforging etc. Why not do this kind of open development for movies as well?
Yes, yes, the story should be a “surprise” etc.
But, why not include those who do not care about being spoiled into the creative process? Why not talk about the story by doing some crowdforging/crowdsourcing etc.? You can never be so close to the fans and those who will pay for your product than by including them into the process.
You could test some things, look how well they are received, tweak things up until the fans are satisfied and then you would know that it would be well received instead of hoping that everything you did in your secret little chamber will work.
Those who do not want to be spoiled don’t have to participate.
Maybe it’s time to come out into the open with creating movies just like games are doing and doing it really well.
Does Hollywood Care About The Fans?
o answer this i need to ask another question.
The new ones or the old ones?
If it can get more new ones then no.
If it can’t then yes.
This is just my opinion and i will continue to support anything that gets Trek continuing to hit our screens, I like the new (parallel) universe. However i also grew up and like the old universe.
The first problem, where Star Trek is concerned, lies in the definition of “fan”. There are far too many factions of fandom all residing under the same “Trek” umbrella. TOS-IS-Star Trek fans, TNG-is best-Trek-I grew-up-with Fans, Ds9-is-the-best fans, I-grew-up-with-Voyager fans, 4th-season-Enterprise-is-the-best fans…then there are the I love TMP, TMP is too slow, Nick Meyer, Even number, TOS film only, JJ Trek Rocks, JJ Trek sucks, Trek 5 sucks, Shatner sucks, Let-Frakes-Direct fans. It’s exhausting.
The studio shouldn’t pander to ANY of them. They look at the numbers. JJ’s Trek is raking in numbers that have never been seen before. Sorry, I-hate-the Lens Flares and Orci-can’t-write-his-way-out-of-a-paper-bag fans…Bad Robot Trek is not going anywhere. And that makes me, a JJ fan, very happy! :)
It’s not just fans of ‘Trek. Look at the fan reaction to other franchises, such as the Transformers and the comic book films.
Cry, whine or complain in the end U will not STOP! going to the movies. Hollywood knows this. Besides there’s a “new” generation of movies-goers coming up & they’re money spends as well as yours!
Since Michael Piller opened the doors to fans write for TNG, Paramount has never cared about fans. The finest TNG episodes were written by those fans who now are at the helm of many new succesful series in TV. Paramount is just completelly shortsighted. Too bad. No light at the end of the tunnel. Hopefully, Bob Orci will ammend things. Regards from Mexico to all ST fans.
Yes Orci is the most fan-friendly from the last 2 films – instead of spitting on you after they kick you in the head like the rest, he just kicks you in the head. Much better.
Spot on. Clicked on this pretty much to say that, Don’t get me wrong, there are some writers and directors who do care, but overall the producers want money and they don’t care how it’s made as long as it makes money. Both the new Trek films have been successful because they are both Space Action Adventure Films… In Space.
So….we fans dont make up enough of an audience to make a difference but they also dont care if they piss us off because we will all show up?
I beg to differ. If the fandom didnt matter, they could have slapped the words Star Trek on anything that was flashy and it would sell.
I maintain that Nimoy’s public involvement in Star Trek attracted a great many lapsed fans.
Most of my non-trekkie friends saw the movie sometime after it opened because the word of mouth was good (and most of them needed me to explain to them WTF was going on so they could have a fuller appreciation of it).
If they are talking only about the hardest of hardcore fans, then maybe. But thats a pretty ignorant position to take.
Simple answer. If Hollywood actually paid attention to what was going on with fans, Star Trek Into Darkness wouldn’t have contained the whitewashing and casual misogyny it did. “Caring about fans” is no longer simply a question of “we have to keep our geeks happy by getting the Klingon pronunciation and the look of the spaceship right.” Fans are now demanding that their media reflect and respect the diversity of the real world. Female, queer, and POC moviegoers – who all together probably constitute a majority of people buying tickets to a Star Trek movie, much as Paramount would like to make that fact go away – have traditionally had their needs and wants ignored by the entertainment industry, but are now growing more powerful and outspoken about what they want to see, and Hollywood is going to have to start to keeping up with that in years to come. Star Trek Into Darkness was unfortunately behind the curve in most respects, which is why many people I’ve spoken to and many in fandom disliked it.
The whole concept of this article is somewhat flawed, because it’s assuming that a majority of the fans don’t like the new Star Trek shows. I think it’s a vocal minority. Even on this website, when they had the polls after the Thursday midnight premiere, and through the weekend, I remember that the majority of people thought it was either excellent or good.
Bottom line: Movies are made to make MONEY. Television shows are made to make MONEY. Star Trek, has ALWAYS been produced to make money. It’s not an episodic art film that somehow made it on CBS. It was a profitable show that stayed on the air until it became unprofitable, then was resurrected when they found out it was more profitable than they initially thought. And it stated in the theatre and on the air until it became unprofitable again. Now it’s profitable, and better yet, it’s being spread to other people.
Star Trek is not a private serenade to a few fans, it’s an album released for as many people as possible to enjoy. And sorry, I know a lot of people think it’s grown out of tune, but I still hear the same type of music. It’s a little different, but still the same thing I fell in love with. I’d compare it to the group Sade. Over the years, they might have added a little more electric guitar and lost the jazzy/disco sound, but if you liked them in the 80’s, you’ll like them in the 00’s as well.
Also, there are two definitions of fan. There are people who love a particular thing, and there are people who like a particular thing, but wall themselves into an elitist group and feel that they “own” the particular thing. Hollywood doesn’t care about the latter. They’re going to complain, and you’ll NEVER be able to please them.
As far as the former group, Hollywood listens to them to a degree. People had some misgivings about some areas of the first Star Trek movie. They changed them in some cases (Engineering/Brewery), or addressed them (Kirk’s rise to Captain).
16. Oscar – June 26, 2014
Marvel cinematic universe is made for fans. Great success. Iron Man, The Avengers, Capt. America…
Abramverse is made for casual movigoers. Mediocre success.
Marvel cinematic universe is the formula: a extended universe made by fans with talent for fans.
The Marvel universe still has enough substantial changes that would enrage Marvel fans of the caliber or Star Trek fans. Some of the changes were completely unnecessary. Khan played by a white guy? How about Jarvis not being a GUY at all, but a computer program? Speaking of, there were purists who found fault with the casting of the Norse gods in Thor. Hogun being Asian? Heimdall being black? They’re NORSE gods, and thus should be portrayed by Nordic looking people, the argument went. Plus, they didn’t like the downgrade from them being gods to more like Aliens. Jane Foster is a physicist instead of a nurse? Why isn’t Bucky a kid in Captain America? 17 year olds can join the marines, why not make him 17?
But for many people, those arguments never reached their ears, because they were casual fans and moviegoers. Same thing with Star Trek, most people won’t care.
Fans and Star Trek Fans are undoubtedly Sweet Persons who follow their heart and passion, they re very Imaginative and the rest of people tends to find that…odd? Maybe?
But that’s ok, it’s wonderful to feel Special!
Studio’s like Paramount , (and like all Major Corps.) have Advisors and Analysts and Generous People, (like Bob Orci – otherwise he would not have come here).
Their Job is to Get the “pulse” and make decisions.
The problem with Star Trek fandom is the high percentage of vocal Talifans and fundamentalists who will automatically crap on something that is new and different from what they’re accustomed to. They’ll think they’re the majority by belittling and persecuting those who have enjoyed the BR movies. These folks resort to the “Abrams raped and butchered Trek” argument out of pure vile and hate. There are fans like these in the comic book and “Star Wars” genres as well, but Trek Talifans are the most militant, and numerous. They are the minoriy, but unfortunately, especially on this site, they tend to be the loudest, crudest, rudest, sensationalist, outrageous, and partial as you will ever witness.
The BR movies have been the most successful, in terms of bringing in new fans. The Talifans don’t like this fact, and are continually doing their best to spoil the fun for everyone else. But it ain’t going to work. The success of the reboot movies have proven it.
The fans are important long term, because they are the ones buying the merchandise. The last two films were successful (though it’s important to note that domestic box office dropped for STID) but the money they made, while impressive, is not that much against the millions in fees paid for licensing five Star Trek TV shows worldwide, plus the money gained through merchandising. Every time a TV station runs a Trek show, they have to pay. New York pays, Cleveland pays, Poland pays — ad infinitum. Also what is a fan? Plenty of people enjoy and watch Star Trek, but will never visit a site such as this, or buy an action figure or model kit. Some new fans will be created by the reruns of old shows. Good stories are timeless. Even if we had holodecks, a good story would work, but last years cutting edge FX would be instantly rendered obsolete.
on related note, thoughts?
“It isn’t clear what the Forbes writer is using as a source for the claim that Trek fans “disagree” with the choice of Roberto Orci.”
I guess that you didn’t follow the discussions on various Trek sites, when the news broke out, from Trekmovie, Trekcore to Reddit & other forums where many people disagreed with the idea of hiring a first time director like Orci.
@32. Red Dead Ryan
“The BR movies have been the most successful, in terms of bringing in new fans. The Talifans don’t like this fact, and are continually doing their best to spoil the fun for everyone else.”
So people didn’t like the BR Trek because it brought in new fans !! What a dumb idea even for you, RDR.
There are more serious problems with the new BR Trek, specially STID, which we talked about here for a million time & I assure you that bringing in new fans is NOT one of them :-)
The vocal minority brought it on themselves. And they deserve it.
When you rant like an elderly maniac about the beautiful canon, and when you are clearly lying through your teeth to bring back an old universe, of course you will be dismissed by Hollywood.
I think Hollywood is even ignoring the perfectly sane fans now. We can thank the true fans for that.
HEY!! How come i can’t vote?!? =(
“Do you think that Paramount cares about Trek fans?”
with regard to cinematic product: it speaks for itself – DEFINITELY NOT! =(
with regard to profit extraction: it speaks for itself – YOU BET ‘YER @$$!! =(
34. boborci: re: thoughts?
i’m really starting to dis-like you… =(
@ 37. NuFan – June 26, 2014
“The vocal minority brought it on themselves. And they deserve it.”
Agreed, Hollywood was always listening to the fans since the silent movie era but now they are running away from us! They should send us all to the concentration camps immediately!
Well I loved ASM 2! I know I’m one of the few,especially the socalled fanboys. I’m not a fanboy,I just like what I like and don’t overanalyze it or pick it to shreds. I’ll probably enjoy the new Turtles movie as well,LOL! And Spidey wasn’t a failure,despite what some people might believe. Look at what it’s earned,and more to come when it’s released on dvd/br.
So thanks Bob,for ASM 2! And for still being involved in the Trek comic by the way,which I also love. Don’t care what anyone says or thinks about that,lol!
Before we dismiss the new director of Star trek 3, how about they get the movie made then we can bitch & moan all we want. Will this director make a film we want as fans, I doubt it, for one thing JJ will still be the producer. Producers have to make sure the movie caters to the masses, not just a certain group of fans. Even this round with the Hobbit films are a far cry from the books and the Lord of the rings series. I can’t wait till the Star war fans start bashing JJ for that up coming film. It not because it will be a bad film , it just Star War fans can be just as vocal as Star Trek fans. I will say the next Trek film will be much like the first 2. Hey ,its all about making money , when will movie goers get that. Even if Orci wants to make a Trek fan film , it won’t happen, He is going to have to meet the studio in the middle, it will always be that way. The Trek of the past is now in fan made films. That Trek is gone, the times are different now. But as they say things that go around ,come around. Maybe 30 years from now someone will try to do Trek like it was done before.
I’ll go on record as stating that THIS fan is NOT against Bob Orci as director! Quite the opposite!!
“Bottom line: Movies are made to make MONEY. Television shows are made to make MONEY. Star Trek, has ALWAYS been produced to make money. It’s not an episodic art film that somehow made it on CBS. It was a profitable show that stayed on the air until it became unprofitable, then was resurrected when they found out it was more profitable than they initially thought. And it stated in the theatre and on the air until it became unprofitable again. Now it’s profitable, and better yet, it’s being spread to other people.”
I own I.M., Thor, Cap, Hulk, Avengers on blu-ray… TOS S1-3 on blu-ray…
nu-trek? don’t make me LAUGH!! =P
we tried it in ’09… it sucks even worse now… =(
All they care about is money, just like the actors at the conventions, they don’t care about you, me, or Star Trek, if there was no pay check, they wouldn’t be there. If the fans are worth more money than the non-fans, they’re get a movie for fans, otherwise it’ll be for non-fans. It’s not very hard to figure out and it makes sense. We’ll get a few nods but nothing more.
My friend, I like new things, if new and intelligent things, but I dislike new and silly things…new Galactica is Ok, because is new, intelligent and quality stuff…Nu Trek is more brawn than brain, it is a noisy and silly show…a movie for easy movigoers…
Crash Trek …
Interstellar will be true sci fi for intelligent people and it will earn more money than Orci’s Crash Trek….
6. Phil123 – June 25, 2014
I do agree with the assessment of STiD. ‘Hamfisted’ indeed. As to whether they care about the hardcore fans, well, I have my doubts given they’ve invited back one of those responsible for STiD to not only write the next one but to direct it too.
I guess this is Orci’s one big opportunity to show it was the other guys who made the last movie the dogs dinner that it was.
13. Aurore – June 26, 2014
“Trek fans were not able to keep the last show (Enterprise) on the air…
This is a misleading statement in that it ignores the real problems of the show.
I’m a “Trek fan,” and I had become so disillusioned with Berman Trek by the time of ENT that I simply lost interest when Season 2 failed to be much of an improvement over Season 1. It was only people here, years ago, strongly recommending that I check out Season 4 that prompted me to do so. And I’m certainly glad that I did, because it rocks (and so does Season 3, IMO).
But I see people here comment all the time that they didn’t like ENT. Whether or not they’ve seen Season 4, I can’t say, but I suspect that they gave up on the series like I did during its original run.
The point being that “the fans” were not immune from the problems with Berman-era Trek. TNG was hugely popular with general audiences. DS9 and VOY split that audience share, each ending up with half (or less in the case of VOY) of what TNG had had.
VOY was a disappointment to fans as well as to general audiences, as was NEMESIS. By the time of ENT, much of the goodwill of the fans had simply dried up. We’d stuck through an entire series (VOY) and a string of feature films which had all failed to live up to their predecessors. The TNG films got progressively worse after FC.
So, while there are those fans (God bless them) who will simply put up with and support literally anything with the Star Trek label on it, that particular breed of devotee is not representative of the entire “fan” base and, as the article states, those unconditional Trek lovers are not numerous enough to keep a bad show on the air.