Fast word of mouth already hurt Star Trek

[RichA]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22594332

[nick]

On May 20, 6:42 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22594332

Someone in the comments section to one article about Star Trek's
underperformance over the weekend said that Star Trek fans shoudn't
want Star Trek Into Darkness to fail because it means the next one
will be cheaper with a cheaper director. But that's what Star Trek
fans want. I'm not even a Star Trek fan and I wouldn't mind the
franchise getting downsized and more modest in its ambitions.

[Tom]

I wonder if Abrams comments about his desire to make an action flick
with the Star Trek characters used as backdrop contributed to the
underperformance. I would think a comment like that would put the fans
on the fast track to the next auditorium.

Tom

[moviePig]

I'm more inclined to think they just (slightly) overestimated the
Power Of Trek. The reviews were good ...and I'd figure very few
people who were noticing Abrams in the first place were still
uncommitted to seeing the movie.

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <3a59295f-4139-4d76...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,

Isn't that kind of what happened after ST:TMP, which led to the best
Trek: TWOK?
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[Tom]

I've always thought Trek fans liked all things Trek, regardless of its
artistic quality... i.e. bad Trek is better than no Trek at all. My
Trek geek friends say JJ's movies aren't true Star Trek... I dunno...

Tom

[moviePig]

On May 20, 11:23 pm, Tom <drso...@aol.com> wrote:
> On May 20, 10:01 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 20, 10:44 pm, Tom <drso...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 20, 9:40 pm, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 20, 6:42 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22594332
>
> > > > Someone in the comments section to one article about Star Trek's
> > > > underperformance over the weekend said that Star Trek fans shoudn't
> > > > want Star Trek Into Darkness to fail because it means the next one
> > > > will be cheaper with a cheaper director.  But that's what Star Trek
> > > > fans want.  I'm not even a Star Trek fan and I wouldn't mind the
> > > > franchise getting downsized and more modest in its ambitions.
>
> > > I wonder if Abrams comments about his desire to make an action flick
> > > with the Star Trek characters used as backdrop contributed to the
> > > underperformance. I would think a comment like that would put the fans
> > > on the fast track to the next auditorium.
>
> > I'm more inclined to think they just (slightly) overestimated the
> > Power Of Trek.  The reviews were good ...and I'd figure very few
> > people who were noticing Abrams in the first place were still
> > uncommitted to seeing the movie.
>

> I've always thought Trek fans liked all things Trek, regardless of its
> artistic quality... i.e. bad Trek is better than no Trek at all. My
> Trek geek friends say JJ's movies aren't true Star Trek... I dunno...

So, those guys are the ones who I'm guessing went, kicking and
screaming, to Abrams's first two and who will be in line for his
third ...a "loyalty" I'd offer as evidence that word-of-mouth has
roughly zero impact on ST first-weekend receipts. Even the second
weekend, w.o.m. seems unlikely to hurt ...beyond failing to deliver
the always hoped-for bonus.

[Captain Infinity]

Once Upon A Time,

Tom wrote:

>I've always thought Trek fans liked all things Trek, regardless of its
>artistic quality... i.e. bad Trek is better than no Trek at all. My
>Trek geek friends say JJ's movies aren't true Star Trek... I dunno...

I've been a Star Trek fan all my life, have all the episodes memorized, been
to many conventions, collect everything, etc. I saw the first reboot "Star
Trek" movie and have no intention of going to the new one. This is Star Trek
only in the way that MAD Magazine's "Star Blecch" cartoon is Star Trek.



**
Captain Infinity

[calvin]

On May 20, 11:38 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> So, those guys are the ones who I'm guessing went, kicking and
> screaming, to Abrams's first two and who will be in line for his
> third ...a "loyalty" I'd offer as evidence that word-of-mouth has
> roughly zero impact on ST first-weekend receipts.  Even the second
> weekend, w.o.m. seems unlikely to hurt ...beyond failing to deliver
> the always hoped-for bonus.

I didn't much like the last Star Trek, except for the beginning,
in which (paraphrasing) Kirk's father was commander of a starship
for 12 minutes and saved 800 lives, including Kirk's mother and
himself.

Question: Does the new one contain any part as good as that?

[moviePig]

I think I'm not on that wavelength enough to answer. E.g., there have
been few movie moments ever that I'd consider worth an entire sitting.
--

[nick]

On May 20, 11:50 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2013/may/21/star-trek-into-darkness-writer-underwear-scene

[Russell Watson]

A 10-second shot of Alice Eve in bra and panties? Otherwise, nothing
nearly so profound or memorable. I enjoyed the movie to some extent,
felt manipulated/aggravated by it in others, and 4 days later have
trouble remembering any specific lines that I can repeat verbatim, which
is rare for me.
There is a part where Spock explains to Uhura what he felt when Vulcan
was destroyed in the first movie ( '...A great disturbance in the force,
as if millions of souls suddenly cried out in terror..." Oops: wrong
franchise!) and how that shaped his emotional control thereafter, but
that's about it. Everything else is something you've seen before, albeit
in an altered form.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-21, Captain Infinity <Infi...@captaininfinity.us> wrote:

> I've been a Star Trek fan all my life, have all the episodes memorized, been
> to many conventions, collect everything, etc. I saw the first reboot "Star
> Trek" movie and have no intention of going to the new one.

Expected from a dullard who uses the term "reboot" to make a movie
that's never existed, before. I gotta boot fer ya.

nb

[reilloc]

Sorry, the boy's right. He could have called it a stobor and he'd still
be right. Incidentally, why isn't "reboot" correct here since, as far as
I know, when applied to the producing of cinematic works, there's no
rule that says you can't call what they term "porting" in the video game
industry (moving to a different platform) "rebooting?" Besides, "to
reboot" is a computer term meaning "restart" (a machine or operating
system) and that's pretty much what the Star Trek movie(s) did to the
franchise.

LNC

[RichA]

People are too used to the grotesque over-the-top look of movie/video
games today.

[RichA]

On May 20, 11:46 pm, Captain Infinity <Infin...@captaininfinity.us>
wrote:

I'm of the same mind, almost. I gave the 2nd movie a chance, and it
is not living up to my impressions of what Star Trek should be.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-21, reilloc <rei...@gmail.com> wrote:


> reboot" is a computer term meaning "restart" (a machine or operating
> system) and that's pretty much what the Star Trek movie(s) did to the
> franchise.

Dude, as if! Like, lose the luser fail and don't be sick, etc, and
other poseur nonsense.

nb

[Captain Infinity]

Once Upon A Time,

Have the doctors given you any idea about when the medications will start to
take effect, or did you just forget to fill the prescription?



**
Captain Infinity

[Russell Watson]

On 5/21/2013 9:38 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <slrnkpo510...@nbleet.hcc.net>

> Reboot was used for Batman when Chris Nolan took over (2005), and for
> the new Spider-man movie, among others. The first time I saw it used for
> a film was probably in 2004 in reference to the up-coming Batman movie.
> Also at the same time for the new Doctor Who series, but that turned out
> not to be a reboot.
>
> It is possible it was used for the BattleStar Galactica series before 2004.
>
> I think, but I am not sure, that it was used in the 90s for the Legion
> of Super-Heroes comic book reboot.
>
> It was not used for the George Perez Wonder Woman reboot in 1986 or 87.
>

"Sum of All Fears" was classified as a reboot of the Tom Clancy Jack
Ryan universe, and I'm pretty sure "Casino Royale" and the subsequent
Bond films starring Daniel Craig have been referred to as a "reboot" of
that franchise many times. Can't cite a specific instance but I wouldn't
be surprised if it has also been applied to "X-Men: First Class". In
other words, anything that resets a existing series back to it's
beginning and starts over with different actors invariably gets called a
"reboot", and any reboot that alters the previous version in any
appreciable way is referred to as a "retcon". They are the terms that
are currently in vogue for it whether someone likes them or not.

[nick]

On May 21, 12:19 pm, Russell Watson <russell-wat...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> On 5/20/2013 11:50 PM, calvin wrote:
>
> > On May 20, 11:38 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >> So, those guys are the ones who I'm guessing went, kicking and
> >> screaming, to Abrams's first two and who will be in line for his
> >> third ...a "loyalty" I'd offer as evidence that word-of-mouth has
> >> roughly zero impact on ST first-weekend receipts.  Even the second
> >> weekend, w.o.m. seems unlikely to hurt ...beyond failing to deliver
> >> the always hoped-for bonus.
>
> > I didn't much like the last Star Trek, except for the beginning,
> > in which (paraphrasing) Kirk's father was commander of a starship
> > for 12 minutes and saved 800 lives, including Kirk's mother and
> > himself.
>
> > Question:  Does the new one contain any part as good as that?
>
> A 10-second shot of Alice Eve in bra and panties? Otherwise, nothing
> nearly so profound or memorable. I enjoyed the movie to some extent,
> felt manipulated/aggravated by it in others, and 4 days later have
> trouble remembering any specific lines that I can repeat verbatim, which
> is rare for me.

There is one specific line that can be repeated verbatim by most
anyone with a basic knowledge of things Trek . . .

(By the way, if that picture in the Guardian's news story about Alice
Eve's bra and panties shot is any indication, Chris Pine is going to
look like Ray Liotta when he gets older.)

[calvin]

What color is that shirt? I think they used the same
color in the previous movie, and I wonder what the
thinking was that came up with it.

[RichA]

On May 21, 10:22 pm, Russell Watson <russell-wat...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> On 5/21/2013 9:38 PM, Lewis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > In message <slrnkpo510.34c.not...@nbleet.hcc.net>
> >    notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:

> >> On 2013-05-21, reilloc <reil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> reboot" is a computer term meaning "restart" (a machine or operating
> >>> system) and that's pretty much what the Star Trek movie(s) did to the
> >>> franchise.
>
> >> Dude, as if!  Like, lose the luser fail and don't be sick, etc, and
> >> other poseur nonsense.
>
> > Reboot was used for Batman when Chris Nolan took over (2005), and for
> > the new Spider-man movie, among others. The first time I saw it used for
> > a film was probably in 2004 in reference to the up-coming Batman movie.
> > Also at the same time for the new Doctor Who series, but that turned out
> > not to be a reboot.
>
> > It is possible it was used for the BattleStar Galactica series before 2004.
>
> > I think, but I am not sure, that it was used in the 90s for the Legion
> > of Super-Heroes comic book reboot.
>
> > It was not used for the George Perez Wonder Woman reboot in 1986 or 87.
>
> "Sum of All Fears" was classified as a reboot of the Tom Clancy Jack
> Ryan universe

Please, don't remind me. I thought I'd purged it from memory. I'd
class that one was being on the level of "Green Lantern" or
"Daredevil." Side issue, I was hoping they'd start using Clancy's
other hero character and do one of his stories.

[Russell Watson]

Yes, the "origin story" for the man known as John Clark as told in the
novel _Without Remorse_ would make a good movie, despite mining a lot of
the same territory as the series of novels featuring Mack Bolan/the
Executioner character, and for that matter the comics with Frank
Castle/the Punisher.
That was Clancy's last really enjoyable book for me.

[Russell Watson]

On 5/21/2013 10:56 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <knh9u4$7dq$1...@dont-email.me>

> Russell Watson <russell...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 5/21/2013 9:38 PM, Lewis wrote:
>>> In message <slrnkpo510...@nbleet.hcc.net>
>>> notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2013-05-21, reilloc <rei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> reboot" is a computer term meaning "restart" (a machine or operating
>>>>> system) and that's pretty much what the Star Trek movie(s) did to the
>>>>> franchise.
>>>
>>>> Dude, as if! Like, lose the luser fail and don't be sick, etc, and
>>>> other poseur nonsense.
>>>
>>> Reboot was used for Batman when Chris Nolan took over (2005), and for
>>> the new Spider-man movie, among others. The first time I saw it used for
>>> a film was probably in 2004 in reference to the up-coming Batman movie.
>>> Also at the same time for the new Doctor Who series, but that turned out
>>> not to be a reboot.
>>>
>>> It is possible it was used for the BattleStar Galactica series before 2004.
>>>
>>> I think, but I am not sure, that it was used in the 90s for the Legion
>>> of Super-Heroes comic book reboot.
>>>
>>> It was not used for the George Perez Wonder Woman reboot in 1986 or 87.
>>>
>
>> "Sum of All Fears" was classified as a reboot of the Tom Clancy Jack
>> Ryan universe,
>

> I don't remember that word being used, but I'd stopped paying much
> attention to Tom Clancy by then.

>
>> and I'm pretty sure "Casino Royale" and the subsequent
>> Bond films starring Daniel Craig have been referred to as a "reboot" of
>> that franchise many times.
>

> Yes, but Batman rebooted first.

>
>> Can't cite a specific instance but I wouldn't
>> be surprised if it has also been applied to "X-Men: First Class".
>

> Much later than Batman.
>
Maybe I missed the point: I was just saying that it's still the term du
jour for such things, wasn't aware someone was trying to pin down first
use. Seemed like someone started off implying that someone else's use of
it was passe'.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-22, Captain Infinity <Infi...@captaininfinity.us> wrote:

> Have the doctors given you any idea about when the medications will start to
> take effect, or did you just forget to fill the prescription?

Oooh, the meds card. How original. BTW, I'm over 12, too.

nb

[notbob]

On 2013-05-22, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> Reboot was used for Batman when Chris Nolan took over (2005), and for
> the new Spider-man movie, among others.

I don't suppose there's any hope you might sense a pattern, here.

nb

[notbob]

On 2013-05-22, Russell Watson <russell...@comcast.net> wrote:

> use. Seemed like someone started off implying that someone else's use of
> it was passe'.

No. Just stupid. What's next? Re-bizzle?

nb

[reilloc]

I think I'll play the classic flounce card. You're just here to try to
pick fights with strangers.

LNC