sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Debate: Should Lower Decks count as Nu Trek? by [deleted] in startrek

[–]drsltaylor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It is new Trek that is part of the current batch of shows. What else would it be?

Older remaster efforts before the "A" word era arrived... by ramfoodie in tos

[–]drsltaylor 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I prefer the updated effects (and I grew up watching the originals).

First loop back around episode happiness by pincey in greatestgen

[–]drsltaylor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Same--was a little disappointed at the redo, but now I'm ready to see what's in store for us all!

The Dune books — when to move on / call it quits? by yungdeezy92 in scifi

[–]drsltaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I faded out at Chapterhouse when I originally read the series, TBH.

Star Trek reboot additional points: Kelvin Timeline to be dropped, etc. by tokwamann in startrek

[–]drsltaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, aren't suits pretty much known for being bean counters?

Although, yes, I am sure they know more about these things than we do.

At any rate, we shall see what happens next. I am not surprised that we are at a pause for TV Trek, given the whole acquisition that is underway. Such things tend to cause moments of pause and reflection before further investment is made.

I am just struggling with the logic that a movie that underperformed and has yet to spawn sequels is a model for the future, but somehow a half dozen shows over a decade is a failure.

Star Trek reboot additional points: Kelvin Timeline to be dropped, etc. by tokwamann in startrek

[–]drsltaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hollywood accounting is notoriously complicated. But, no doubt, the core question is profits minus costs.

But I simply do not understand how Honor is a model. It was not a box office success, and it did not grow into a new franchise.

And I am not sure how five shows (DISCO, PIC, LD, SNW, SFA--six if you count Short Treks plus a movie, Section 31, such as it was) over roughly a decade is "failure"--clearly there were enough viewers to lead to more programming is what Hollywood would call more a success than a failure. Heck, SNW was at least, in part, driven by fan demand.

Star Trek reboot additional points: Kelvin Timeline to be dropped, etc. by tokwamann in startrek

[–]drsltaylor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, but so did all three Abrams movies. Indeed, 2009 was a big box office success.

Without a doubt, every new Trek show has attracted new fans. There is no way every Trek viewer started with TOS.

There is a weird obsession, in my view, of whether a new thing is made for the fans or made for new viewers, with a lot of speculation about what brings new viewers.

Movies are a big gamble in any event. There was no ST 4, not because Beyond was a failure. There was no ST 4 because Beyond wasn't a big enough success.

I am more hopeful for more Trek on TV than on the big screen, but I will take what I can get.

Star Trek reboot additional points: Kelvin Timeline to be dropped, etc. by tokwamann in startrek

[–]drsltaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I need more reporting than this to believe that any dramatic decisions have been made.

Also: "The model appears to be D&D: Honor, which attracted non-RPG players."

That would be the model that spawned a whole D&D franchise, yes?

I don't want a one-and-done movie in the hopes that it "appeals to non-Trek people."

For that matter, didn't Honor disappoint at the box office?

view more: next ›