Cinematical

I say GOOD! The source is completely accurate. The trekkies let Star Trek die. Even during it's final season when Enterprise was a top notch show, they let it wither and die. Fact is, trekkies have killed off star trek. They blasted Enterprise before it ever aired, the last movie was a flop. They simply aren't supporting it anymore, or there are too few of them to make any difference. Reaching for a wider audience is the smartest thing the studio can do. If the trekkies are pissed, it won't really matter, cuase they are simply not the majority anymore, and are nowhere near being a sizable amount to make the movie flop or turn a profit. The studio needs that new audience.

Reply

Matt Damon is to tall.

Reply

i'm not a trekkie, but i think it's a little ridiculous to say they "let it die". should fans support a series or movie they think sucks? i know a LOT of rabid trek fans and they generally say that voyager was bad and enterprise was worse.

if they want to make 1 more sucessful star trek film, spite the fanbase and woo the mass market. if they want to revitalise the franchise, woo the mass market but don't spite the fans... which, ultimately is what they will i'm sure try to do.

Reply

I can't believe anyone is taking the Matt Damon rumours seriously. How on earth could Damon play a "young" Kirk? Damon turns 36 in less than two months, whereas William Shatner was a mere 35 when the first episodes of Star Trek were aired back in 1966. In other words, Damon is now older than Captain Kirk and could therefore not play him when he was only a cadet.

Reply

The mass market is by and large not interested in science fiction, particularly Trek stuff. And it is not that the fans did not keep Enterprise on the air, it was that Paramount deliberately sought to sink the franchise so they could pry it from the Roddenberry trust. Enterprise was an excellent show that Paramount started badmouthing from the outset.

Nor do I think that generic fans are lured by directors' names. However, if they manage to pepper it with enough stars and violence and buy out enough People and EW reporters, they may make their money back. Absent that, I don't see the 18-24 market being all that idealistic or imaginative.

Having fouled their own nest, Paramount should ditch Star Trek Babies or any other sequel for about 10 years, when memories have cooled.

Reply

I was always under the impression that Enterprise died because it was a pretty lame program, not because Trek fans didn't have the power to keep it on the air. I liked The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine back in the day, but the whole franchise took a turn for the worse sometime after TNG went off the air. Most fans didn't even bother with the last couple of Trek films. I wonder if that executive realizes how many Trekkies there are out there who just decided not to buy the crap the franchise has been selling lately. Either way, as a former Trekkie who's since moved on to Alias and Lost, I think Abrams ought to be a pretty good fit.

Reply

The only problem I had with Enterprise was that it took place before Kirk and the technogology was better than the orginal series. Plus, I saw the last movie and thought it so cool so don't say that I was involved in letting the franchise die.

Reply

he is partly right. It's really hard to advertise anything Star Trek nowadays, considering the connections Star Trek has with nerds, geeks, dweebs, losers, and acne. You'll never see a theater that is absolutly packed for Star Trek. Never. Broadening their horizens might actually help the series for once, although that 4D ride down in Vegas was pretty awesome.

Reply

I think that Paramount is right and wrong, if the source is credible. First off, one poster said that the public is not interested in science fiction. Ummm...like hell they are not. Ever since the Space Age movies and books and magazines about space and aliens are the best selling stuff. Most of the top grossing movies in history have to do with either space or aliens.
So Star Trek is a rich franchise that has an enormous appeal value. The fact is since TNG left the air the franchise has not appealed to a mass audience. I think that Paramount should maintain Roddenberry's vision and still try for mainstream success.
I don't like the prequel idea, but I would like A-listers like Matt Damon to be onboard and perhaps actors from the previous series. Just imagine though, if Enterprise had been a ratings success, there would have been Enterprise movies. So this J.J. Abrams appraoch is more interesting to me!

Reply

Trekkies are generally people of good taste. Which is why Entreprise did poorly. You can't slap the "Trek" label on any tripe and expect trekkies to buy it.
Just like most trekkies don'y buy "Lost" (it's not even sci-fi - let alone a coherent story), they won't go to this formula sci-fi wannabe. What's an "Alias" anyway?
And, a caveat to people doing cut & paste for the box office: pissing off your intended audience before you know what you want to do - not the way to go.

P.S. I would have tried anything when David Boreanaz was rumored to star. Now, you're on your own.

Reply

Here's a better idea: why isn't Abrahams do a "Lost/Alias - The Motion Picture" instead?
I remember trekkies lobbying for trek movies for years - and that was because - here's the secret - the original Trek series was extremely good.
I never heard of "Losties" or "Aliasies" - i guess hype can only get you so far. But good luck with that Frankenstein project of yours - I am sure by now all your intended audience is writing their boycott signs for this.

Reply

i'm a huge lost fan. in fact TONS of people are. young and old. i bet its as popular and far reaching now as star trek was orginally. i think jj abrams will breathe new life into star trek and make it accessible to a new group of modern fans. if you and your friends dont like. well take your ball and play somewhere else and live in the past. loser.

Reply

Actually, Trek fans did not let Trek die. If ALL the "trekkies" watch a series it is still not enough for the networks to think of it as a success, it must bring in a new audience.

And if J.J. Abrams and the schmucks in charge of Star Trek XI decide to turn trek into something that advocates and excuses torture like Alias and Lost, then they will find out just how bad things can be when trek fans DO want something to die.

They have been warned.

Reply

I've heard Abrams is himself a "Trekkie" - I look forward to him doing a terrific job. I would rather see Trek in the hands of a passionate "outsider" who knows how to make a good show, than being churned out by the perhaps-too-insular cabal that may have ended up too close to the material and lost sight of the big picture. (Sorry to say it, too, because I really liked "Enterprise" once they got over the trying to "sex it up" all the time -- come on, rubbing each other with decontaminants?? Had to stop watching for almost 2 years for that)

And Abrams and co. know how to keep their eye on the fan base as well -- I highly doubt there will be any fan-screwing going on. (insert your own joke about Trekkies, unlikelihood of being screwed, etc. etc.)

Oh, and Save Joop!

Reply

"i'm a huge lost fan. in fact TONS of people are. young and old. i bet its as popular and far reaching now as star trek was orginally. i think jj abrams will breathe new life into star trek and make it accessible to a new group of modern fans. if you and your friends dont like. well take your ball and play somewhere else and live in the past. loser."

I like Lost as well as Star Trek, but it is just plain folly to think there will be Lost fans 40 years from now. Star Trek's 40th anniversary is this September, and the show is still relevant to this day.

Gene Roddenberry's vision has withstood the test of time. What Paramount can't seem to get through their heads is that it is the message Gene was trying to spread that resonates with the fans. Fans don't want Alias with phasers we want to see more of Gene's original vision.

Reply

In my opinion, the only thing that killed Star Trek, was Paramount!! They totally screwed it up, and got it all wrong, especially with the TNG movies. What were they thinking? Oh, I know, Enterprise = MONEY

Reply

They should let Star Trek die. Just like they should let Indiana Jones and Die Hard die. They made 2 too many Trek movies as it is.

I like the idea of JJ Abrams re-inventing Star Trek but I'd rather not see it if it means that all the Trekkies are going to bitch and moan about it and protest it like it was a civil rights violation or something.

And hesdeadjim... you've never heard of psycho fans of Lost? We're everywhere.

Reply

First, I think it is ridiculous that anyone would try to besmirch Trek fans by saying they want to bring in Alias fans. Are you kidding me? Alias went out with barely a wimper. The Alias fans abandoned the show long ago. I would argue that the only reason ABC didn't cancel it outright was because they were doing Abrams a favor as thanks for the success of LOST.

I also take issue with the notion that "Abrams and co. know how to keep their eye on the fan base". That sounds to me like a comment coming from a LOST fan that hasn't really looked into the Abrams and Co. history. In fact, the exact opposite is true. Many fans were disappointed with the train wreck that was the end of Felicity. As evidenced by the nearly non-existant ratings, the fans weren't so big on the end of Alias either. And, if you follow the ratings for LOST, it spent most of its second season bleeding millions of viewers because the story has become so disjointed and convoluted that people aren't putting up with it anymore. Have a look at the bitterness fiesta over at TWoP sometime. What About Brian? Come on now. That's like Melrose Place minus the Heather Locklear fun. I haven't seen Six Degrees yet, but given the history, I'll go in with lowered expectations.

Maybe that is all a good sign for Abrams doing movies. He, or rather Bad Robot, seems to be full of great ideas, but lacking the follow through to actually pull them off over a long TV arc. Maybe JJ's work will be better suited to being seen in shorter two hour chunks.

Reply

While I agree with the philosophy of bringing in the widest audience possible, I take issue with the statement that "Trek fans were not able to keep the last show (Enterprise) on the air."

This implies that Paramount thinks it can put any show on the air, slap Star Trek logos on the upholstery and expect the fanbase to follow. It doesn't work like that, Chubbo!!!! People who are fans of ST care about quality storytelling and good actors just as much as any fan of anything.

What Abrams and Paramount should concentrate on is MAKING THE BEST MOVIE POSSIBLE. PERIOD. Do that, and the Trekkies - and everyone else - will surely follow.

Reply

Matt Damon, of course! How about Ben Affleck, too? Kirk and Spock, both regenerated from a puddle in the Boston Common. I think Tom Cruise might make a good Christian Science Officer and let's have Quentin Tarantino direct. Put some Kung Fu in there to spice it up. Sounds like Star Trek to me.

Reply