STAR TREK AND THE BIG SCREEN...A PROBLEMATIC RELATIONSHIP?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 фев 2024
- Welcome back to One Trek Mind and today Raptor and Michael are talking about the Star Trek films, in particular why Star Trek seems to struggle with making a big screen adventure sucessful. Let us know your thoughts below!
#startrek #startrekmovies #startrek2009
LCARS screens taken from System 47
Music Used in the Video Background:
Track: Autumn - KV [Audio Library Release]
Music provided by Audio Library Plus
Watch: • Autumn - KV | Free Background Music |...
Free Download / Stream: alplus.io/autumn
Credits are given by writing this in your credits / description:
"Art of Silence - by Uniq"
avaliable here - • Art of Silence - Drama...
"Tokyo Music Walker - Way Home" is under a Creative Commons (CC-BY) license.
/ @tokyomusicwalker...
Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: bit.ly/way-home-song 
Развлечения
😊
i think the star trek big screen issues happen to go along with the small screen issues, lately. some bad writing, wrong people in charge, not giving fans the food they want for their hunger.
Raptor: I think in terms of the abrams movies bad writing a hallmark of them.
Michael: I think those definitely are a part of the problems at play, but I do think it's a bit more as well in terms of what a movie is expected to be in comparison to a show.
@@OneTrekMind thats true, wrath of khan was a movie to me, search for spock was a tv show. the next generation: first contact was a movie, rest were like tv shows. but in the old way, episodic. everyone has their own opinions and thats healthy, and all are valid.
They do actually. It was always a bit of hit and miss, but Star Trek First Contact and Star Trek The Undiscovered Country are among my favorite movies.
Raptor: First Contact and The Undiscovered country remain two of our favourites as well. The point of this video was to stimulate conversation because while there are good trek films, it cant be denied many of them have problems, and the latest three have been pretty awful.
First contact is absolutely awful.. basically the JJ movies 1.0...
Complete misreads of the characters, action movie schlock, stupid/nonsensical creations (BORG QUEEN), and stupid retcons
@@timewarpdrive77 Raptor: Interesting opinion. Im glad this video is stimulating conversation ^^ After all that was the point heh
Michael: I wasn't saying Star Trek can't make good movies, there are a lot I really liked. I'm saying from a business perspective they've never performed like the studio would want because of the problems we discussed throughout the video.
Old the star trek are the best 😊
The TOS movies were great and overall were commercially successful. I wouldn't call that a "problematic relationship". I think they were successful largely because 1) there was a sufficient time gap between TOS and the films which allowed them to take advantage of nastalgia/cult status, 2) they were well-written. I agree with the point about whether Kirk could have outsmarted Khan but ultimately Khan as a villain was a sideshow in that movie---the core of the movie is about Kirk facing aging and his lost youth and how he gets over it--this is relatable for anyone who may think their best years are behind them. Voyage home was a good example of how you do something totallly different and be creative while sticking to the core of what makes Trek Trek. Also I didn't care for the false dichotomy between big franchises and indie films. Prior to the nostalgia boom of the last 15 years there were plenty of successful movies which weren't massive franchise movies.
Raptor: I dont agree that all the TOS films are well written (The Final Frontier springs to mind). I agree that perhaps our view of what is 'financially sucessful' might be a bit too present day and maybe we should have looked at the TOS films at their time rather than now so I agree that was a mistake we made here.
Michael: Commercially successful is something that many many movies are able to do. In order to compete as a franchise it needs to be a bit more than that. That being said for the time they performed decently same as the modern Abrams films.
@@OneTrekMind If they are adored by fans and commercially successful how is that problematic? Also in terms of budget vs box office they are more successful than Abram’s films. Voyage home’s box office was 5x budget, wrath of khan was 8x budget as was Star Trek iii- even Star Trek VI was more than 3x budget. Into darkness was 2.5 times, as was Star Trek 2009 and beyond. When you take into account that marketing usually is 2x budget it’s likely that the return on capital on the original movies far outweighed the JJ Abrams movies, which were more or less run of the mill action spectacles.
@@Gizmo1981Raptor: Adored by fans? I call that into question. Wrath of Khan, Voyage home maybe. But TMP, Search for Spock, Final Frontier...they arent great. As for being comercial sucesses, compared to other films of the same period, they were not fantastic. TMP did not do as good as Paramount hoped, and when it came time to make a sequel they slashed the budget to make the movie cheaper. The point of this video was also not to stay stuck discussing money, since thats only the start of sucess but to also dicuss story and such. I stand by what we said in this video. But thank you for commenting and discussing with us. The whole point of this channel is to talk and share views ^^
I think your assessment here is very subjective and represents a minority view. While everyone is entitled to their opinion and there are lots of fans that didn't like the Wrath of Khan for its violence (I believe I once read that Gene himself didn't like it), i believe it's pretty generally accepted that Star Treks, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are good movies amongst the fandom, just that it's pretty accepted that Star Trek V is dumpster fire. And while I also agree that TMP did not perform in line with expectations, objectively it was fairly commercially successful and its box office was more than 3x its budget, and even the Final Frontier was not exactly a box office bomb. I would hardly say that Star Trek doesn't belong on the big screen or has some problematic relationship with it, i just think that Star Trek is not Star Wars, or Marvel, or DC and shouldnt be made with 200 million dollar budgets with the idea of broadly marketing to the mass market. I think the movies should be treated more along the lines of mid-tier and shouldn't need 500 million at the box office to break even--that doesn't mean they can't make good movies. The TNG movies just weren't very well written and I think the writers really struggled with bringing the characters onto the big screen so soon after the series ended. @@OneTrekMind
Huh? Most of TOS movies are great (the two non great ones just suffered from behind the scenes issues), TNG movies sucked studio interferance and berman taking over fully, and the JJ-Abrams movies were doomed from their very concept (aka, action movies made by a guy who doesn't like star trek, but still using the brand).
There's nothing inherently Unmovieable about ST
Agreed. There are tons of bad takes in this overall but ultimately the JJ Abrams movies were pointless action flicks using the Star Trek IP, which then begs the question of-- what's the point? Do we still have more Star Trek stories to tell? Or is basically just nostalgia bait dressed up as a modern cookie cutter action flick.
Raptor: Well I'd argue that theres really only 2 good TOS movies. But everyone is entitled to an opinion here. The purpose of the video was to stimulate conversation, not to annoy.
@@OneTrekMind What 2 movies are those?
@@timewarpdrive77 Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country in my eyes. The Motion Picture is too slow in pace and kinda ugly, Search for Spock destroyed the emotional pay off of the previous film, Voyage Home is alright. Final Frontier is awful. Just my view though. Again we werent trying to annoy anyone...
This Is a shit take on tos movies
Raptor: Everyon is entitled to an opinion. And the purpose of our videos is to stimulate discussion.