View Single Post
Old 05-29-2013, 02:12 PM   #260
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814 View Post
We all accepted that old trek wasn't a viable option for a massive summer blockbuster. This movie is a pandering incoherent mess that coldly exploits preestablished star trek without grasping what the intent of the original source material was.
But you can't make money by grasping what the original source material was about.

Or rather you probably can make money, but you can't make enough money, because it seems the studio doesn't care if a movie turns a profit.. it's not comparing a movie's income to its costs, it's comparing a movie's income to some theoretical line that's defined by what other movies have made enough money.

That's why I like that io9's article's comment that Star Trek does best on TV, because even the definition of success on TV is different (small subset of dedicated viewers vs. having to draw a significant portion of everyone for blockbuster movies).

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814 View Post
make a new movie with new ideas. Don't make a superficial emotionless imitation that lacks any heart or consequence. The lens flares were cool.
If they went lower budget and got good writers, that'd be awesome.

Or farm it out to a smaller studio that cares less about hitting a certain percentage of profit to justify making a Star Trek movie vs. making some other generic blockbuster movie and cares more about making a great movie and if they make some $$ even better. Embrace the smaller audience.

I hope they go TV and get some talent on board. I want Trek on TV that makes me like it like I liked BSG.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to photon For This Useful Post: