Gothneo, on 22 Oct 2013 - 8:07 PM, said:
I think you misunderstood... I was asking if you think the property is perfect the way it is? I think it could be improved, and it sounds like we have common ground there.
We certainly do, it's been something that I've been saying for a while now that the studio's need to sort out how they plan to move forward with Star Trek. The biggest disappointment I've heard in recent years concerning Star Trek was that JJ Abrams was ready and willing to stick with Star Trek and create a multi-platform, multi-media brand out of Star Trek and the studio's turn him down??? I mean what the hell are they playing at! Star Trek is never going to be anything more than a couple of movies every so often, we're already seeing what 4 years of down time did to the excitement surrounding Star Trek in 2009 did to Into Darkness's rep online and if Paramount AND CBS don't get their act together and either sell off the rights to Star Trek to another studio or indeed allow Abrams Bad Robot to produce Star Trek then there is no franchise and Star Trek will quickly become forgotten by an audience it still very much needs.
You know why haven't we seen a kids cartoon? Why haven't we seen live action Star Trek on TV and the merchandise that would accompany any large global franchise? It started in 2009 with such promise and rather than just pressing ahead without JJ Abrams and getting a sequel into the cinemas for the summer of 2011 to keep the momentum going with Abrams still very much onboard as an executive producer steering the ship, Paramount screwed it up and waited for Abrams... An Abrams pissed off at the lack of common sense and business sense of both Paramount and that idiot running CBS.
If this franchise goes to the wall again, it's not the fault of Abrams and his team. Its the fault of those greedy executive producers running CBS and less so Paramount who've ruined the trek. Who in their right mind thinks they can build and grow a sustainable franchise, bringing in all ages, young and old, fans and non-fans with just TWO successful movies in FOUR years... Absolutely ridiculous.
Gothneo, on 22 Oct 2013 - 8:07 PM, said:
So if I understand you correctly... your issue isn't with any of the discussion? I think your basic issue is with the title of the discussion?
Absolutely. VF is assuming that Into Darkness must be one of the reasons Paramount had to lay off workers because he's bitter about Abrams ever making Star Trek movies. I am completely fed up with not just VF but online fans in general thinking they have some overbearing claim over Star Trek, thinking that they know the right way to tell a Star Trek story... Well go on then! Tell a Star Trek story!!!! Have the balls to go into film making and make the Star Trek you've always wanted to see! If not then shut up and just comment on the specifics of the story! If you didn't like the way this was portrayed, or this was written, fine! Just stop with the "this isn't Star Trek" bullshit! The fans are an important part of Star Trek and any franchise but they do not have any right to shout from the top of their voice ridiculous statements regarding someone else's idea of what Star Trek is... In this case we have JJ Abrams and his team being accused of "raping" Star Trek, of destroying Star Trek's original vision and all that guff and that is complete nonsense.
Fans are far too quick to dismiss and unfairly so, someone else's interpretation of Roddenberry's original idea. Who's to say Roddenberry got it right all the time anyway? I mean IMO Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness do a much better job at merging thoughtful character moments with big action than ANY of the Star Trek movies EVER, I don't see what all the fuss is about Wrath of Khan, it's not as good as Into Darkness! However, ALL film is subjective and unfortunately fans just don't get this. There is no right or wrong answer when it comes to making and telling a Star Trek story. Star Trek Into Darkness is as much a STAR TREK movie as any of the previous 11 movies and 5 TV series were.
As for its success... I'm going to lay it out in sub headings for you to follow point by point my thinking.
Do I think Star Trek Into Darkness was a success? Yes, and here's why:
It made more overseas than any previous Star Trek movie.
It made its money back for Paramount to green light a third movie
Critics loved it for the most part
The audiences who went to see it loved it even more
and...
Fans for the most part loved it too.
Do I think Star Trek Into Darkness was a creative success? Maybe.
It was a beautiful looking movie.
The REAL baddie of Into Darkness was Admiral Marcus and his role was awesome
The parallels it drew with the modern day and politics and morals about confronting terrorism were clear to see (I'm not sure why you can't see them). unmanned drone attacks, militarising an otherwise peaceful Starfleet, reacting to the destruction of Vulcan was very much handled in the same way as the United State's reaction to the destruction of the World Trade Centre. I think Into Darkness was a movie that really did show us how it is so easy to react with violence when confronted with unimaginable amounts of destruction and how, 12 years on from 9/11, the right way to act is by peaceful means. In Kirk's closing speech in Into Darkness Kirk says
"There will always be those who mean to do us harm... To stop them we risk awakening the same evil within ourselves. Our first instinct is to seek revenge when those we love are taken from us, but thats not who we are. We are here today to rechristen the USS Enterprise and to honour those taken from us nearly one year ago. When Christopher Pike first gave me his ship he had me recite the Captain's oath. Words I didn't fully appreciate at the time. Now I see them as a call for us to remember who we once were and who we must be again. And those words..."
That speech really sums up what Into Darkness was all about. It's a story, a movie about our world coming to terms with such tragedy and devastation and eventually, although there will always be those who mean to do us harm, now after 12 years, its time to look toward the future, remembering who we've lost, who we once were and who we must be again... A powerful thought for a summer blockbuster to have and how you didn't get that message of hope in it is unbelievable really.
The acting was superb all round with Simon Pegg, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Benedict Cumberbatch all doing incredible things
Khan? meh I'm 50/50 on this but it didn't spoil the movie for me. Cumberbatch was a very suitable Khan, an incredible villain but I feel that he could have easily been John Harrison without ever being Khan.
I wish they'd have killed Spock Prime off in the first movie because Spock Prime didn't really need to be in Star Trek Into Darkness and I wish he'd said to Spock, I can't help you.
Spock yelling Khaaaaaan was silly. I do understand why they felt it was a good idea to have the roles reversed but whilst in the Wrath of Khan, Kirk, Spock and Khan had a history with each other, in Into Darkness we'd barely seen Spock and Kirk work together so I felt that the whole death of Kirk scene just shouldn't have been done at all which would have meant that Khan's ridiculous super blood wouldn't have been needed either.
It wasn't as fresh a movie as it should have been after 4 years, I love it, I think it's a better movie than the first one but whilst the first was such a radical departure from what we'd all become familiar with, I think Into Darkness really didn't progress as much as it should have. It took more steps back in terms of advancing these characters than steps forward but again I think had they just done a movie about the 5 year mission, we'd have felt like Pine wasn't really ready to be Captain so it for me was a story we needed but not necessarily a story we wanted.
Was it one of the reason's Paramount laid off workers? No, because had all of Paramount's movies made the sum of money Into Darkness made, then Paramount would have made X and Y and maybe then some with the profits from World War Z. Could it have been a better story... yes, was it a relevant story... yes, does it set us up for a third Star Trek movie which will perhaps embrace its own universe and fly solo without Old Smock telling them about dangers to come... YES!
So whats wrong with Star Trek? I guess to the people who love Star Trek in all of it's many forms won't really care about this question, I kind of don't either but what makes me care is that I want more Star Trek! Now some will argue that the current movies aren't Star Trek... Well they are... The difficulty with Trek is where do you take it in a world where Trek is shown, there are no more taboo's. People may still question things but the internet has given people the freedom to share opinions and to view material that in the 60's would have been considered shocking. The trouble is with some fan's arguments is that there isn't anywhere Star Trek could have gone that either the internet or other shows haven't been before... You put a gay couple on the bridge of the Enterprise and I'm sure some people would be shocked by that but most people wouldn't bat an eyelid, you have a transexual captain and again, shocked but not surprised... Why? Because it's all been done on other shows. in the 60's it was different, there had not been a show like Star Trek, a show where women were in roles of authority, where coloured people had the same responsibilities as white people, where people of different race's, religions and sex worked together in harmony to explore space, which in itself in the 1960's was a fascinating place and gave people huge hope for the future, this was the era in which we put a man on the moon. Until we put a man on Mars, I doubt people will really be as enamoured with space so Star Trek has to offer something more than what it had been offering people in the 60's... And IMO JJ Abrams captured what it needed to survive today, he completely understood the tone of TOS, he understood its importance, and it understood what was important about it, the characters, the stories and he also understands what's important about filmmaking in today's world, IMO we couldn't have asked for a better take on the final frontier than Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness. They've both fully respected the source material and expanded on it by bringing in modern movie making techniques and resources... The elephant in the room is however, how does the studio get younger viewers into thinking Star Trek THE BRAND is as good, as exciting, if not better than Star Wars and other family friendly franchises so it can legitimately compete with the biggest franchises out there: Star Wars, James Bond, Harry Potter, Marvel, DC... Star Trek should be up there competing with those brands yet it's not.
Animated TV series for kids
Removing the old Star Trek TV series from TV stations world wide to cement any new Star Trek production's position
Live action TV series for families to watch together on at a time and on a network that is as good as it gets
Movies just as we've been getting them since 2009 every two years - beginning with Star Trek 3, we would see 5 movies starring the current cast of JJ Abrams Star Trek's charting their 5 year mission (each movie would be one year of the 5 year mission).
A continuation of restoring classic Star Trek for blu-ray
Developing web-only series with fan productions such as Phase II
Developing a web series with Netflix (in addition to the broadcast TV series) which would be geared toward older fans and unsuitable for kids/family viewing.
For merchandise... I'd probably end DST's license and have Hasbro focus on producing proper toys and KRE-O sets for any new Star Trek production and then once a toy line is up and running and selling well, allowing Hasbro to develop product based on the classic Star Trek's including a Black Series style line. I would license EA games or the developers of Mass Effect to work on Star Trek titles for PS4, Xbox One, WiiU and future games consoles. As well as the major merchandising brands, I would continue to work with QMx producing replicas from across the entire Star Trek franchise, I would bring in Hot Toys to develop a range of high end 12 inch scale action figures based upon classic and Abrams Star Trek. NECA, Funko, and other brands who already hold a Star Trek licence would continue and be expanded upon.