Star Trek Lawsuit

[Raymar3d]

Activision Files Suit Against Viacom, Terminates "Star Trek" License

In court papers, Activision said it "...cannot successfully develop and sell 'Star Trek' video games without the product exploitation and support promised by Viacom. A continuing pipeline of movie and television production, and related marketing, is absolutely crucial to the success of video games based on a property such as 'Star Trek'."


http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/industry_news_display.php?story=1851

[Sorrento]

I just don't get it... Nemesis was not a big box office hit NOT because it was bad but because the opening date was near LOTR: TTT.

People judge it bad becasue of the bad reviews some other people gave it, of course its not like the mega hit trilogy... nothing is anyway.

Maybe Enterprise is a twist which goes against Activision, because its harder to make games about a precuel to the original series, but if that law suit is only because of Nemesis then GIVE ME A BREAK!.

I challenge anybody who thinks it sucks to watch it all over again, and then tell me what they think compared to Attack of the Clones' second view... the second is really boring and the other not.

Insurrection, well that is something else... but it has been years since that release.

Sorrento

Btw, Elite Force II rocks!

[Raymar3d]

I agree with you. Nemesis is a good Star Trek movie. I would have been cool to have Spock in it though.

Ken

[Sorrento]

You mean ambassador Spock? Well yes, he should have been in the movie... something tells me L. Nimoy wasn't reasonable to join the project.

Spock was involved with the change of power in the Romulan Star Empire from what we saw in TNG, helping the "resistance" among other things.

About Activision, I don't know why they complaint that much. Partially they are responsible for how low their games have been selled so far. We see TV advertising for almost every game out there, but not for ST games. Funny don't you think?

Sorrento

[Raymar3d]

You know, Activision probably put out the best ever Star Trek games, IMHO, the Starfleet Command series, based on the old table-top Starfleet Battles game. It's just plain fun.

I hope the developer, Taldren, will be able to continue to create the game, maybe for another developer if Activision isn't going to continue with Trek.

Ken

[une]

I just don't get it... Nemesis was not a big box office hit NOT because it was bad but because the opening date was near LOTR: TTT.

People judge it bad becasue of the bad reviews some other people gave it, of course its not like the mega hit trilogy... nothing is anyway.

No, Nemesis was a bad movie. I say this because it failed, horribly, on every single level.

It wasn't a critical success at all. Out of 133 reviews at rottentomatoes.com only 54 were good and even the good reviews were somewhat doubtful of the film.

It failed financially, making 97 million dollars in it's world wide gross. Sure it only cost 70 million to make, but once you add in the marketing and distribution costs, which would be at least another 25 mil, this film fails to break even. You can't blame it's failure on LOTR: TT either, it failed to even come in #1 on it's opening weekend. ST: N was beaten by Maid in Manhattan and then dropped to #8 in it's second week in theaters.

It was bad. Only a bad film could fail like that. A good film would have at least gotten good reviews.


Maybe Enterprise is a twist which goes against Activision, because its harder to make games about a precuel to the original series, but if that law suit is only because of Nemesis then GIVE ME A BREAK!.

It's not just because of Nemesis. The entire Star Trek franchise is on a downward spiral.

Enterprise's second season Nielson Ratings were only half of what they were in the first season and were on a gradual decline throughout the rest of the series.

That's why Activision is filing this lawsuit. They think believe that Paramount is running the Star Trek franchise into the ground, something a fair amount the fans agree with. It's not so much that it's hard to make a video game based off a prequel, Star Wars does it all the time, it's just that they can't properly sell a product based on something not popular.


I challenge anybody who thinks it sucks to watch it all over again, and then tell me what they think compared to Attack of the Clones' second view... the second is really boring and the other not.

Attack of the Clones got better critical reviews, better fan reaction, and it made significantly more money. How could the critical and financial failure that was Star Trek Nemesis, possibly be better than AOTC?

[Raymar3d]

I disagree, Une.

Despite it's financial failure, Nemesis is still a rip-roaring good Star Trek adventure.

I liked it a lot. The only complaint I had with it was it felt too short in the character department for a final adventure, and could have benefitted from the scenes that were cut from both the script and the actual filmed footage. It did have Picard playing Rambo a little too much, but what the heck, it's just a scifi movie....

Data did give his life for his captain, isn't that worth something?

Have the fans grown so callous as to not care about the characters anymore?

Sad if true.

Ken

[jjrakman]

I didn't like Nemesis either. To me it seemed like they were trying too hard to recapture the magic of The Wrath of Kahn. I'll try to explain.

TWOK - A mysterious villain out of Kirk's past

Nemesis - A mysterious villain out of Picard's past


TWOK - A piece of new technology used as a devastating weapon

Nemesis - A piece of new technology used as a devestating weapon


TWOK - The logical one who represses human emotions dies by saving his captain

Nemesis - The logical one who explores human emotions dies by saving his captain


TWOK - The logical one passes "something" to McCoy that allows him to be reborn in part III

Nemesis - The logical one passes "sub-routines" that may allow him to reborn in the next movie


So I felt like I saw it all before. I think it would have been much better if they were going to do a movie with the Romulans, to make it revolve around Spock and the Romulan power struggles and how it could have effected the Federation. But then I suppose I'd complain that it was too much like part 6. :cool:

[Senmut]

Lawsuits, lawsuits, lawsuits! the real reason??? LAWYERS!!! When all the dust settles, the only people to have benefitted from any of it will be the lawyers. They see a cash cow and go after it like vampires on a blood mobile.

[Dawg]

While blaming lawyers is a popular sentiment, Senmut, someone must first take some kind of offense at something before lawyers get involved. For example, the lady who burned herself with McDonald's coffee did it to herself, but it was she who went to a lawyer - and I wonder how many lawyers she went to before she found one hungry enough to take that case.

Corporate lawyers try to protect their employers - which is why we have those "do not use while sleeping" labels on hair dryers - because, if it's not listed, money-hungry people who refuse to take responsibility for thier own actions will screw themselves up and try to place the blame on a product rather than thier own stupidity.

Don't blame the lawyers for that kind of greed; they are only a minor symptom of a larger problem.

Besides, I'll bet this lawsuit is as much about publicity as it is for Paramount's support of the franchise.

I am
Dawg
:warrior:

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by Raymar3d
You know, Activision probably put out the best ever Star Trek games, IMHO, the Starfleet Command series, based on the old table-top Starfleet Battles game. It's just plain fun.

Ken

I don't like Starfleet Command that much, well actually I don't know what you look in it. :D

But ST Armada 1 & 2 are awsome, totally beat MS Age of ... type games.

I also like Elite Force II, similar to Jedi Knight II in what dificult it is and how you really need a big efort to complete each level. I haven't finish this one yet, but I don't want it to end either.

Sorrento

[jjrakman]

Welcome to CF Sorrento
:beer:

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by une
No, Nemesis was a bad movie. I say this because it failed, horribly, on every single level.

It wasn't a critical success at all. Out of 133 reviews at rottentomatoes.com only 54 were good and even the good reviews were somewhat doubtful of the film.

It failed financially, making 97 million dollars in it's world wide gross. Sure it only cost 70 million to make, but once you add in the marketing and distribution costs, which would be at least another 25 mil, this film fails to break even. You can't blame it's failure on LOTR: TT either, it failed to even come in #1 on it's opening weekend. ST: N was beaten by Maid in Manhattan and then dropped to #8 in it's second week in theaters.

It was bad. Only a bad film could fail like that. A good film would have at least gotten good reviews.

Well, are you saying that to have a successful film it needs to be a "box office hit"??? In this you couldn't be more wrong even if you wanted to. Right now I can think of at least 10 films from the last 5 years which are totally awsome but also were not "box office hits". Money has NEVER been a way to measure how successful a film is.

One good example is the film "The Right Stuff" which was a BIG BOX OFFICE FAILURE in 1983. Nobody went to see that jewel of a movie, why?, who knows! And it didn't even come close to making what it cost to produce. In your way of thinking The Right Stuff was a failure too probably, a bad movie, and who knows what else.


It's not just because of Nemesis. The entire Star Trek franchise is on a downward spiral.

Enterprise's second season Nielson Ratings were only half of what they were in the first season and were on a gradual decline throughout the rest of the series.


Hmm, you sound like somebody who hasn't watch a single episode of Enterprise... just read about it in a web page; lol, about ratings probably.

No offense, its just that if the ratings are low now its because all the viewers in the US are turning the channel to see something like "Who wants to marry a millionaire", or "Survivor", or "Big Brother", or what ever those reality shows (lol, yeah right) are called now. Even a super "successful" show like CSI drop a few Nielsen points for the mentioned ones.

Again, what people watch or do not watch is no indicator of how good a TV show or movie is. Its not about art either: I don't remember but if memory doesn't fail all the 19th century painters died in poverty, almost the same for musicians... and I am talking about Van Gogh and Lizt to say a few. Haven't we learned something since the last 200 years?


That's why Activision is filing this lawsuit. They think believe that Paramount is running the Star Trek franchise into the ground, something a fair amount the fans agree with. It's not so much that it's hard to make a video game based off a prequel, Star Wars does it all the time, it's just that they can't properly sell a product based on something not popular.


In my humble opinion you, as well as Activision are wrong. Both of you can do and think what ever you prefer of course, the same goes for me.

Also if anybody is bringing the Star Trek franchise to the ground, that anybody is the US viewers of the series. In other countries I have read Enterprise is ranked way above other shows that in the US have better ratings.


Attack of the Clones got better critical reviews, better fan reaction, and it made significantly more money. How could the critical and financial failure that was Star Trek Nemesis, possibly be better than AOTC?

What a laugh, Attack of the Clowns is a very poor movie... no subject, just a bunch of eye candy special efects in very stupid sequences. Like that one where the Jedi's "go save the day"... the worse planned battle in the history of film making!!! Couldn't they plan it a little more, aren't they wise enough to at least do something more intelligent?

George Lucas is messing up big time with his movies, but if money is what he wants then he is very successful. I can watch the original Star Wars, or Empire Strike Back or Return of the Jedi over and over again... I don't ever get tired of watching those. But each time HBO is passing Attack of the Clowns I change channels; I only watched it twice, once in the Theater and once in the TV.

Nemesis, contrary to Attack of the Clowns, I can watch over and over again... similar to the LOTR movies, aparently they have more context and substance in them.

If you don't agree its ok I suppouse, but please in the name of humanity don't tell me you haven't watch any of these like I think you do.

Sorrento

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by jjrakman
I didn't like Nemesis either. To me it seemed like they were trying too hard to recapture the magic of The Wrath of Kahn.

So I felt like I saw it all before. I think it would have been much better if they were going to do a movie with the Romulans, to make it revolve around Spock and the Romulan power struggles and how it could have effected the Federation. But then I suppose I'd complain that it was too much like part 6. :cool:

Good point about Spock. As Raymard and I have said his character should have been part of this project in deed, but probably because Nimoy didn't come to an arrengement with the production team Spock ended up out of the project.

I like Nemesis a lot, it deals with something I wanted to see a lot. Did you understood how in the end Piccard froze up because again he lost his family, even if it was that death clone of himself standing in front of him? Remember his nephew died somehow during the Generations time line, so he was left alone with out much probability of family at all... then all of the sudden this person, someone similar to a son, appears... then try to kill him... then dies. Data's sacrifice was partially because of this.

Something that is interest is how you need old characters to exist in order to like the project. I mean here is just very little and insignificant issue, I know, but in BSG you mention the same thing. For me the characters do not weight more than the context, which in this movie we have a lot.

LOL, A mysterious villain out of Picard's past that is really funny. What past? Schizon was not even a villian back then. Better go wait to watch the new BSG... you are dying to do so probably, wait maybe it was the other way around... hehe.

Yes, I am here... for good or bad... :D

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by Senmut
Lawsuits, lawsuits, lawsuits! the real reason??? LAWYERS!!! When all the dust settles, the only people to have benefitted from any of it will be the lawyers. They see a cash cow and go after it like vampires on a blood mobile.

Arghh, how many words?? 40? 41?LOL, mine were a thousand and I couldn't have said it better... hmm but then Dawg did... lol, ok Lawyers are only resposible for what people let them do.

Sorrento

[une]

Well, are you saying that to have a successful film it needs to be a "box office hit"??? In this you couldn't be more wrong even if you wanted to. Right now I can think of at least 10 films from the last 5 years which are totally awsome but also were not "box office hits". Money has NEVER been a way to measure how successful a film is.

First off, money is the only way to measure how successful a film is. Anyway, a good film doesn't have to make money. Lot's of great films have done bad at the box office. The thing with nemesis though, is that it not only failed at the box office, but it also failed critically. Generally, when a film fails on both of those levels, financially and critically, there seems to be a general agreement among both the general populace and the educated art critics that, "this movie sucks."


One good example is the film "The Right Stuff" which was a BIG BOX OFFICE FAILURE in 1983. Nobody went to see that jewel of a movie, why?, who knows! And it didn't even come close to making what it cost to produce. In your way of thinking The Right Stuff was a failure too probably, a bad movie, and who knows what else.

It was a box office failure, no doubt about it. That doesn't mean it was a bad movie. But it did fail financially


Hmm, you sound like somebody who hasn't watch a single episode of Enterprise... just read about it in a web page; lol, about ratings probably.

I've seen quite a few episodes of Enterprise, more than enough to understand why it's failing at least.


No offense, its just that if the ratings are low now its because all the viewers in the US are turning the channel to see something like "Who wants to marry a millionaire", or "Survivor", or "Big Brother", or what ever those reality shows (lol, yeah right) are called now. Even a super "successful" show like CSI drop a few Nielsen points for the mentioned ones.

Ask yourself this, "why are people changing the channel?" Could it be because the show just isn't good?

You can't blame the shows ratings being sliced in half in the second season and then gradually decreasing after that, on reality TV.


Again, what people watch or do not watch is no indicator of how good a TV show or movie is. Its not about art either: I don't remember but if memory doesn't fail all the 19th century painters died in poverty, almost the same for musicians... and I am talking about Van Gogh and Lizt to say a few. Haven't we learned something since the last 200 years?

I'm not saying it's an indicator of how good a product is. But it is an indicator of how popular something is. Enterprise isn't a popular show. Most people don't like it.

Now wether are not Enterprise is remembered in the future as a great groundbreaking TV show, :rolleyes: , is debateable. But the fact of the matter is the show isn't popular and like I said before, it's difficult to promote products based off something unpopular.


In my humble opinion you, as well as Activision are wrong. Both of you can do and think what ever you prefer of course, the same goes for me.

Also if anybody is bringing the Star Trek franchise to the ground, that anybody is the US viewers of the series. In other countries I have read Enterprise is ranked way above other shows that in the US have better ratings.

So it's the American's people's fault that they don't like Enterprise? It couldnt' be because the show's stupid?


What a laugh, Attack of the Clowns is a very poor movie... no subject, just a bunch of eye candy special efects in very stupid sequences. Like that one where the Jedi's "go save the day"... the worse planned battle in the history of film making!!! Couldn't they plan it a little more, aren't they wise enough to at least do something more intelligent?

George Lucas is messing up big time with his movies, but if money is what he wants then he is very successful. I can watch the original Star Wars, or Empire Strike Back or Return of the Jedi over and over again... I don't ever get tired of watching those. But each time HBO is passing Attack of the Clowns I change channels; I only watched it twice, once in the Theater and once in the TV.

Nemesis, contrary to Attack of the Clowns, I can watch over and over again... similar to the LOTR movies, aparently they have more context and substance in them.

Let's put away personal opinion and look at things logically.

Box Office:

Nemesis: 90 mil world wide
AOTC: 650+ mil world wide

Analysis: Attack of the clones was better recieved, and better liked, by the general populace.

Critical Reaction:

Nemesis: 54 good reviews out of 133 total reviews*
AOTC: 125 good reviews out of 197 total reviews*

Analysis: AOTC was better recieved by the critics.

Hmm, so let's see, the general populace and the critics both enjoyed AOTC more than Nemesis. So how exactly, beyond personal opinion, is Nemesis better than AOTC?


If you don't agree its ok I suppouse, but please in the name of humanity don't tell me you haven't watch any of these like I think you do.

If you find Nemesis an entertaining movie, that's fine. I think 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most entertaining movies I've ever seen, most others think it's boring. But be aware, your opinion is in the minority.


* That's from rottentomatoes.com

[Dawg]

OK, I'm going to weigh in on this little debate.

Nemesis was an entertaining movie. It was not a great movie. AOTC was a very entertaining movie. It, too, was not a great movie, but it was more entertaining than Nemesis.

There are many ways to measure success, money being the one people tend to pay attention to.

There is only one way to measure the quality of a film - subjectively. If, however, there are more people who have a generally negative opinion of the quality than there are people who have a positive opinion of the quality, then the picture will go down as a poor effort.

In other words, quality is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to cinema. Success is measured by the weight of the moneybags collected each weekend.

Nemesis was not a particulaly successful movie. AOTC was.

The quality of either is debateable. Although watching Yoda kick butt was fun. :cool:

I am
Dawg
:warrior:

[Raymar3d]

I like it.

It may not be as popular as the other Treks, but I think that's just because people are tired of the quality of the aliens always being bumpy forehead next door neighbor, in general.

Yeah, there's been episodes that are very flat, but there have been episodes that reminded me very much of Kirk's time, and I'm a classic Trekker since 1966.

I don't care much for the doctor on this show, but I like Archer, T'Pol and Tucker a lot. I think in time, this show will be fleshed out and will improve. It's certainly had a better first two seasons than Next Gen did.

Nothing will ever replace Kirk, Spock and McCoy, though. They were the best of the best.

Ken

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by une
First off, money is the only way to measure how successful a film is. Anyway, a good film doesn't have to make money. Lot's of great films have done bad at the box office. The thing with nemesis though, is that it not only failed at the box office, but it also failed critically. Generally, when a film fails on both of those levels, financially and critically, there seems to be a general agreement among both the general populace and the educated art critics that, "this movie sucks."

It was a box office failure, no doubt about it. That doesn't mean it was a bad movie. But it did fail financially


Many of those "educated art critics" would never give a Star Trek movie a good review. Actually those "educated art critics" didn't give many good review to Attack of the Clowns either, at least here they were right about it.

The general public was affected by the LOTR opening, which was in the same week or a week after. Not everybody has money to go see a movie each week, even in the US I am afraid, and the few who can won't probably be thru ST fans either.

I wonder, did you saw Nemesis? Where did you see that movie, theater or TV? How many times? I have seen it three times since last year, and I have discovered new things about the film... something Attack of the Clones, or Harry Potter (both films) had. One thing though, the Harry Potter films are nicer just because they are about Harry Potter.


I've seen quite a few episodes of Enterprise, more than enough to understand why it's failing at least.

Ask yourself this, "why are people changing the channel?" Could it be because the show just isn't good?

You can't blame the shows ratings being sliced in half in the second season and then gradually decreasing after that, on reality TV.


There you go, you need to see more about it. Enterprise is not an easy series to watch, at least not as easy as TNG or DS9 were.

If the people are not watching the show, its their problem. I can tell you its very good, the best Star Trek show so far and if you don't see this exactly is because you don't like ST or you haven't give it a chace yet,, a proper chance I mean.

About the Rating numbers being sliced in half, I dont think it was the case. Maybe they drop a few, but not that many; if that was the case then the show would have been canceled.


I'm not saying it's an indicator of how good a product is. But it is an indicator of how popular something is. Enterprise isn't a popular show. Most people don't like it.

Now wether are not Enterprise is remembered in the future as a great groundbreaking TV show, :rolleyes: , is debateable. But the fact of the matter is the show isn't popular and like I said before, it's difficult to promote products based off something unpopular.


It isn't popular??? What ST show has been popular? Not a single one I can recall. Even TOS was cancelled because it was not popular.

If its popular or not doesn't matter to me, I like it and that is the only thing important. If its later cancelled, well I will be sad of course but nothing out of the ordinary. Other good series have been canceled because who knows what reason, like Quantum Leap or the original BSG, many more for that matter... if they were canceled because of rating numbers over how good they were, then the problem lies elsewhere.


So it's the American's people's fault that they don't like Enterprise? It couldnt' be because the show's stupid?


Yes it could be, but again I know it is not.


Let's put away personal opinion and look at things logically.

Box Office:

Nemesis: 90 mil world wide
AOTC: 650+ mil world wide

Analysis: Attack of the clones was better recieved, and better liked, by the general populace.

Critical Reaction:

Nemesis: 54 good reviews out of 133 total reviews*
AOTC: 125 good reviews out of 197 total reviews*

Analysis: AOTC was better recieved by the critics.

Hmm, so let's see, the general populace and the critics both enjoyed AOTC more than Nemesis. So how exactly, beyond personal opinion, is Nemesis better than AOTC?


In my opinion, as well as a friend who is a film critic for the local newspaper and also his boss who also is a film critic for the same newspaper... Nemesis is a better film than AOTC.

Lucas film probably has more fans, make more money, cost a lot more, and stuff like that. But that doesn't necesarily means it is a better film.

Did you saw Adaptation? That film was probably seen by a handfull of people, maybe more, but it is really amazing. I literally hated it when I saw it, but upon reconsideration and understanding I am beggining to like it. That, exactly that, is what all those people in the numbers you just gave don't know of. These people want to have "FUN" at the theater, nothing more.


If you find Nemesis an entertaining movie, that's fine. I think 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most entertaining movies I've ever seen, most others think it's boring. But be aware, your opinion is in the minority.


I like Nemesis, I also like 2001: ASO... also I liked the Terminator movies (haven't seen T3 yet), also liked The Horse Wisperer and Mememnto... which probably are considered boring by many. If my opinion is in the minority, so was other people who were right...

Sorrento

[jjrakman]

LOL, A mysterious villain out of Picard's past that is really funny. What past? Schizon was not even a villian back then.

Referring to the fact that the DNA used to create him was taken out of Picard sometime in his past. It was a villain connectedt to the Hero's past. Giving the Hero/Villain relationship a closeness that was reminiscent to the Kahn/Kirk relationship. At least for me.

[une]

Many of those "educated art critics" would never give a Star Trek movie a good review. Actually those "educated art critics" didn't give many good review to Attack of the Clowns either, at least here they were right about it.

Oh, no true. According to Rottentomatoes both First Contact and Insurrection got good reviews from the critics. Insurrection being significantly lower than First Contact of course.

In regards to AOTC, more of those educated art critics liked AOTC than Nemesis.



The general public was affected by the LOTR opening, which was in the same week or a week after. Not everybody has money to go see a movie each week, even in the US I am afraid, and the few who can won't probably be thru ST fans either.

Maid in Manhattan was released the same week as Nemesis and it made over 90 mil in the states. There was no real reason for Nemesis, with it's huge built in fanbase, to not do the same.


I wonder, did you saw Nemesis? Where did you see that movie, theater or TV? How many times? I have seen it three times since last year, and I have discovered new things about the film... something Attack of the Clones, or Harry Potter (both films) had. One thing though, the Harry Potter films are nicer just because they are about Harry Potter.

I saw Nemesis once one video. The horrible word of mouth stopped me from seeing the movie in theaters.


There you go, you need to see more about it. Enterprise is not an easy series to watch, at least not as easy as TNG or DS9 were.

If the people are not watching the show, its their problem. I can tell you its very good, the best Star Trek show so far and if you don't see this exactly is because you don't like ST or you haven't give it a chace yet,, a proper chance I mean.

So, it's somehow better, than DS9 or TNG. Riiight.

You can see by the ratings that people gave it an entire season to pick up, but when they noticed that nothing was going to change they changed the channel.


About the Rating numbers being sliced in half, I dont think it was the case. Maybe they drop a few, but not that many; if that was the case then the show would have been canceled.

No, they were cut in half, it's just that they are on UPN. UPN doesn't get good ratings generally, so even though Enterprise's low ratings would get it cancelled on any other network, it's still coasting by UPN standards.


It isn't popular??? What ST show has been popular? Not a single one I can recall. Even TOS was cancelled because it was not popular.

If its popular or not doesn't matter to me, I like it and that is the only thing important. If its later cancelled, well I will be sad of course but nothing out of the ordinary. Other good series have been canceled because who knows what reason, like Quantum Leap or the original BSG, many more for that matter... if they were canceled because of rating numbers over how good they were, then the problem lies elsewhere.

Wait wait wait... You mean Star Trek, the series that spawned one of the largest franchises in all of sci fi history, had 7 different spin off TV shows, and has had a dozen different based off of it. How can you claim that Star Trek isn't popular?


In my opinion, as well as a friend who is a film critic for the local newspaper and also his boss who also is a film critic for the same newspaper... Nemesis is a better film than AOTC.

His opinion, and yours, are in the minority.

Lucas film probably has more fans, make more money, cost a lot more, and stuff like that. But that doesn't necesarily means it is a better film.

Yes, Star Wars has more than Star Trek. This of course ignores the fact that Star Trek holds the record for the worlds largest fanbase.


Did you saw Adaptation? That film was probably seen by a handfull of people, maybe more, but it is really amazing. I literally hated it when I saw it, but upon reconsideration and understanding I am beggining to like it. That, exactly that, is what all those people in the numbers you just gave don't know of. These people want to have "FUN" at the theater, nothing more.

Adaptation did amazingly well with the critics. It got quite a few oscar nods and several golden globe nominations, and even a few wins. Adaptation was an intelligent film, and was recognized as such.

[emerita]

I am the very first Trekkie, so I say this with a heavy heart...I don't think Star Trek's low box office ratings had anything had to do with being released with TTT. That is just an excuse when the ratings are low. True fans are going to go see both of them even if they are open the same weekends.

As much as I love ST, I have to say I was not that impressed with the last Picard and Data show. They should have shown the wedding, first off instead of the feeble attempt at the reception. They didn't utilize the crew as well as they should have..... needed more interaction. I wouldn't have killed Schizon to start off with; but that is my opinion...and I would have prefered the alternate ending ;and the scene with the crew toasting Data at the end could have been written better....very poor dialogue....me being a writer can take these liberties and I wish I could have been in on it.....but as fate always is; I wasn't that lucky......so, don't anyone get their feathers ruffled. I am a ST lover and supporter, but I have to say this in all true conscience. They focused to much on Picard and Data.....

[Dawg]

Being as much a Trekker as you are, I have to agree. Overall, Nemesis was only an OK episode of TNG.

I also take issue with the new Data - it just seemed too pat. How Data is going to revive in a cruder positronic brain than he had in the first place is beyond me, but then I wasn't consulted, either.

Maybe it was just too many Star Trek cliche's.

Many of the same complaints are true of Enterprise, too. There is too much of TNG/Voyager/DS9 influences, when it was set well before TOS - the Klingon ridged foreheads most notably, the Temporal Cold War another example.

I'm rambling. I'm not happy with the state of the Star Trek universe right now, and lack of sleep is having its effect on me.

(*Dawg is now heading for the coffee pot.*)

I am
Dawg
:warrior:

[emerita]

I totally agree.....

[Sorrento]

LOL, Charmed is more popular than any ST series... just ask the people in the streets about it and they will tell you its about three witches... and about DS9 they will ask how Spock is doing. If I am wrong, God knows I wish, then good for the series... but right now I can tell even Dawson's Creek was more popular than any of the series too... and that hurts!

Enterprise, as a science fiction tv series and as a tv series too is better than DS9. The characters are being developed better, at least till this point. When we see T'Pol go just because the actress didn't came to an arrengment with Paramount, like Terry Farrel did, then it will be equally as good as DS9.

Lucas Film is just a monster of propaganda and advertising. Don't get me wrong, I admire Lucas as well as hate him for this. He develped a project out of stealing ideas from the chinese (Chi equal to The Force) and also from mideval stories to create his SW saga. He did a great job with the original film, then let the work be done by other directors for the second (ESB is the best in my opinion) and the third. But now this "precuels" lack a lot of substance, they are just "eye candy" to trap more kids into the franchize... nothing bad here, just too easy in my opinion. Then there is the "light saber" thing, which EVERYBODY likes... lol, I mean its way cool, that was a great idea and probably one of the few creative ones Lucas had.

Adaptation, as well as other films (The Right Stuff rings any bell?) did great with the film critics but did awful at the box office. This is where we need to separate what the fans, or viewers see and what the film or tv series is or isn't. One thing is beggining to be clear: Good at Box Office, bad as a film... but we all know that if you want to have 2 hours of "fun" you see a Hollywood film, but if you want to see a film because its the so called "7th art" then you see a european film (or any from outside Hollywood for that matter).

I don't recall a film which opened the same weekend than LOTR: TTT and had any Box Office success... if you emerita know one please let me know. You say Maid in Manhattan, I say yes it made around $200k more than Nemesis in the opening week. But now I will say IMDB.com fans gave MIM 4.8 rating and gave Nemesis 6.5... The Box Office numbers are 3 to 1 right now in favor of Nemesis, but what is funny is how people who saw MIM rate it poorly while people who saw Nemesis rate it not as bad; I saw MIM and thank god I didn't pay to see it, it would have been a robbery instead.

About the characters in Nemesis, well perhaps they should have give more screen time to others... specially the Reman Viceroy and the commander Donatra (Dina Meyer), because with her alone a big character for future projects would have been inminent. Where I think nothing more was needed was with Schizon himself, he kept saying who he was and how Piccard had no argument to make him change becase "they were both alike"; remember Piccard should have died when he was younger, and much more like Schizon?

About Data, who said anything about him being reborned in B-4? His "positronic" net is primitive and could never develop as a lifeform as Data did. Data is death I am afraid, but like Q said once "all good things...". Then about Data and Piccard, there was nothing much about it in Nemesis, instead they focused on Piccard's lack of family (nobody noticed or what?) and how he is presented to something similar to a son and then he not only has to kill him but when he does he realize what he lost.

About "Enterprise", well I just read the ratings numbers and they dropped 1/3 in the second season from what they were in the first one. Actually I don't know what happened here, because in my opinion the second season was a lot better than the first one; perhaps all the curiosity was gone and many people abandoned the series after a couple of episodes, but because the numbers were great the average remained high thru all the season.

In the second season we had a lot of Klingons, maybe too many but what the hell: we cant have enough of those dudes. Also the "Blue dudes with antenas in the forehead" (Andorians?), they are being exploted like never before something which will help them develop into the next "best friends" of humanity after the Vulcans.

The Vulcans, or "neo-Nazi Vulcans" as I call them, are very well written too. We are told they think of themselves superior to other races, something entirely diferent from what they were in the Kirk-Spock era. Probably they will evolve as a society in the future, but right now they were responsible for humanity being stuck in the solar system and almost of an interplanetary war with the Andorians. Here we have a lot to watch just to see how it evolves.

The Klingons and their rigged forheads, opposed to what John Colicos character Kor looked like in TOS, is just a renewed makeup technique and lots of the remake-reimagined done to the franchise since ST: The Motion Picture. If you think what Worf said in that remake-revisit of DS9 to the Tribble Station is important, then you should ask yourself what other reason could they invent to have older Klingons and now newer ones... its just something that needed to be remade in 1979. Btw Dawg, lack of sleep is cured by sleeping not taking coffee... hehe.

Then I read Paramount is going to change Enterprise direction in this next third season, to probably try to take back that lost 1/3 of audience... but in my opinion it could ruin the series a bit too: maybe the audience wants something diferent, but if they don't like something good because it doesn't have a war like in DS9 its is really bad. If you saw the last episode, "The Expanse", you probably know of the "Federation marines" which are now traveling with them in the ship... they want to find this new enemy and destroy it or something like that. This is what I don't like but I understand is what people want to see.

Marketing a pre TOS game would be really dificult in deed, but to create it would be a lot more. What do you propose for an Enterprise game?, something like Elite Force II (Q3 engine and all?), or an Armada type game, or what about a Starfleet Command type of game (please don't!, this type I don't like). Perhaps Enterprise as a single series for the franchise was too little, and another one with the Nemesis time continium should be next to run parallel; maybe like DS9 and Voyager did for a while, nothing to do one with the other but they coexisted. That could help the franchise a lot, to have the best of both worlds.

Perhaps this is Paramount's solution to the "problem" Activision is mentioning... to create another series from the Nemesis era in the near future to run along Enterprise, and show it at WB... LOL!!!!

Sorrento

[Sorrento]

Hmm, change in the forum? Why did they take away all the font options??? WHY!!! lol

Sorrento

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by Sorrento
Hmm, change in the forum? Why did they take away all the font options??? WHY!!! lol

Sorrento

Why I said, because I didn't click on the right button... OY! :mad:

He he, :D

Sorrento

[LadyImmortal]

I totally agree.

I haven't been happy with the state of the Star Trek Universe since Berman took over.

I did give him a chance and even watched MOST of Voyager but I have no use whatsoever for Enterprise and thought Nemesis was merely so-so. (Though I did enjoy it...)

Oh well...

--Rhonda

[Kai]

nooo! no more trek shows.
the last good trek was DS9. when that ended, the whole corperate milkcow should have been rested instead of beign allowed to decay this way.

remember the quote attributed to the actor playing Chacotay about the script of the finale of Voyager - 'is this the best you can come up with?'

says it all about Voyager, Enterprise and the new movies...

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by Kai
nooo! no more trek shows.
the last good trek was DS9. when that ended, the whole corperate milkcow should have been rested instead of beign allowed to decay this way.

remember the quote attributed to the actor playing Chacotay about the script of the finale of Voyager - 'is this the best you can come up with?'

says it all about Voyager, Enterprise and the new movies...

Ok, maybe you like waiting 25 years... I don't. I watched all the shows of Star Trek (all the series) and I am not dissapointed so far, not even with DS9.

People say they disliked DS9 because of the big war issue. For me it was because of that and because the only good characters were Odo and Quark; everything fun to watch was between those two.

The war that lasted entire seasons was really bad for the show. Yes you will say "I love to see space battles", me too, but if you are watching a series just to see that I am afraid its just too little. Also to watch space battles alone I would be happy playing Armada and Armada 2. :D

Then you didn't like Voyager's finale? What about DS9, did you liked that one? I have it here as an MPG, I thought it made Voyager's look pretty in comparison. Maybe you have diferent points of view, but I consider yours are wrong on this subject alone; on Elite Force 2 they fill the blanks left by the end of Voyager, which were left over with out explanation till now. Go buy the game if you haven't, you will not be disapointed... hmm maybe you will, its obvious we have opposite taste. I respect your opinion, as well as Robert Beltran's one... but as you with mine I don't like yours.

There were a lot of flaws in DS9, like the size of ships compared to their battle potential, which haven't been fixed so far even with the release of games like Armada which put the size of the ship in its real perspective. Don't anybody noticed how powerfull were the Defiant or the Bird of Prey?, but in reality those ships are less than medium size and could never be compared to a big Galaxy or Sovereign Class, as well as a WarBird or a Keldon or a Vor'cha Class (forget about the Negh'Var)... thanks to Armada site for those names lol. In the movie Nemesis they mention how masive the Scimitar by mentioning its weapons too, which were around 3 to 4 times what the Enterprise E have.

Then what was all that about the Emisary, where is Sisko, what happened to him? There was no point in that, worse for the poor Gul Dukat and Kai Winn... no point on how they died. Very pointless, even if we all know it was a 10 episodes made to fit into 2 only. If "Endgame" was bad in your opinion, why you are considering "What you leave..." a good finale? Maybe you are ok with Sisko going who knows where, but are against future Janeway helping the crew of Voyager.

We had a great finale of TNG with "All things...", then we had a terrible one with DS9 in "What you leave...". Then Voyager was not as bad in "Endgame"(check out Elite Force 2). If you don't like Enterprise maybe you haven't given it a proper chance yet, or you expected something else entirely... but again that doesn't excuse the lack of a proper chance either.

Sorrento

[Kai]

I hated Voyager. My opinion...
as for the flaws in trek.. who cares? it's a show.. but a show thats grown stale and boring with each try at keeping the fans paying for stuff..

as for waiting 25 years? LOL I'd wait longer for a good show.. and have done..

anyway.. back to prepping for Doctor Who - 40 years in the Tardis..

[BST]

Very interesting discussion.

** Possible Spoiler **



FWIW, my thoughts regarding the "success" or "failure" of ST:Nemesis, SW II: AOTC, or ST: ENT revolve primarily around each show's timeline in relation to the rest of its franchise and also to market saturation.

What I mean is this -- ENT and AOTC are similar in the sense that they are 'prequels' thus, you know that eventually, with ENT, the United Federation of Planets will come into existence with fleets of starships exploring the vast reaches of space and protecting the member planetary systems of the Federation. You know that eventually, with AOTC, that Anakin Skywalker will become Darth Vader, that Palpatine will become the Emperor, and that Anakin's son, Luke, will destroy the Emperor. For some folks, some of the lustre of a particular show/franchise is lost, if you know the eventual outcome. For me, I enjoy the shows because I want to see how they get there.

Regarding "market saturation", and not counting ST:TOS, Star Trek has been on the airwaves, in its various incarnations, for most of the last 16 years. This doesn't count syndication. The franchise may have reached a point that no matter what was created next, it would not do as well, simply because people were growing just a bit weery of it. ST may have been better off not going directly into ENT until several years AFTER the end of Voyager. On the other hand, Star Wars has only appeared as 5 full-length motion pictures. Add to that at least a 15-16 year lag between ROTJ and TPM and you have an appetite for viewership.

I say this, as a very dedicated and long time fan of the ST franchise (32 years). I will definitely stand amongst those who feel that Roddenberry, etal, "wrote the book" on Continuity. But, at the same time, I also realize that one can only expect to harvest a crop on ground that is fertile and every so often, you've got to let that ground lie dormant and nurture it back to fertility. Otherwise, what led to growth, in the first place, is all depleted.

*puts pitchfork and straw hat away*

BST

[Kai]

'If you don't like Enterprise maybe you haven't given it a proper chance yet'

seen them all.
why? cos I gave it a chance.. but after the whole 'transporter dream' episode I realised that they need new writers, new producers and to take this show in a whole new direction. right now, it's wasted old and stale.

I'd rather watch re-runs of Doctor Who (laughing at the effects) or the new BBC show - Strange. Watch for it. Well written, well thought out and well acted. it'll open your eyes....

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by Kai
seen them all.
why? cos I gave it a chance.. but after the whole 'transporter dream' episode I realised that they need new writers, new producers and to take this show in a whole new direction. right now, it's wasted old and stale.

I'd rather watch re-runs of Doctor Who (laughing at the effects) or the new BBC show - Strange. Watch for it. Well written, well thought out and well acted. it'll open your eyes....

Well then, what do you suggest they do with Enterprise. Answerign something like "I want it to be removed" is not what I am looking for because you say its bad and that needs good writers... so you probably have a suggestion of the direction, in your opinion, the show must take. I still think Activision suit is way out of order.

As for Doctor Who, Strange or any other BBC show, I wish I could see them. I remember Doctor Who from around 20+ years ago from the local TV, and what a show that was; it had a terrible production as well as a very creative writing, which of course made any flaw unoticed.

Right now the only two shows, other than Enterprise, that have caught my eye are Gilmore Girls and Everwood... at least nothing else before them was similar.

And please Kai, take a look at Elite Force 2... that if you play games. You will like it. Also if you liked DS9 war then you will love Armada(s).

Sorrento

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by BST
Very interesting discussion.
BST

BST, what are you thoughts on Enterprise and the Activision games, and after that about Activision law suit?

I like your explanation and point of view of the whole deal, specially when you talk about the movie SW: TPM... in my opinion that is the only way the movie could be mentioned, because the real name is really awful. As for the Star Trek universe, I still don't know why I like each series regardless of how bad they might be.

For example, I consider DS9 to be the worse series of all. The war with the Dominion destroyed it, and almost took down the whole franchise. As for Voyager, in my opinion it was a return to the "non soap-opera" type of episodes TNG gave us. With each episode Voyager put a whole new deal, not a continuation of the last episode (to a certain point of course), which was something TOS had and many people loved.

Perhaps this was what many people didn't like about Voyager and liked about DS9 and TNG. For me TNG was ok even with the story line soap opera like, it was very good and a whole new deal for the ST universe, Then came DS9 and after a few seasons I got tired with it; again the big war was something ST is not about.

Enterprise right now is a clean break from the two styles, hopefully will remain that way. For me the whole series has been very well written, with each episode detailing a story not before told in another ST series... with the exception of some of them, specially the Klingon ones.

You see opposite to the Star Wars prequels Enterprise did explore some things that were left unexplained from TOS. While Star Wars TPM didn't told us who the Sith were or how a Princess was "elected" by the people (which for me sounded really wrong), Enterprise is exploring why Kirk never thrusted the Klingons or why the Romulans are so private about their stuff. I wanted to know about this, and Paramount decided to indulge me.

Btw, WHO ARE THE SITH??? LOL, if I didn't play Dark Forces 2 Mystery of the Sith I wouldn't have a clue... and I still don't know much about those and why they were "nearly extinct".

Sorrento

[BST]

Sorrento,

I actually liked ENT when it first aired and watched nearly the 1st season without interruption. Then, other commitments kept getting in the way and my Wednesday night TV viewing habits basically went out the window. I haven't seen much of the 2nd season although, I would like to go back and see what I've missed.

To paraphrase what I mentioned earlier, watching a prequel is a bit anti-climactic because you know what will eventually happen in the overall storyline. What I enjoy and what would keep my interest in a prequel is the actual journey in getting to the present day, i.e., ENT eventually getting to the ST:TOS timeframe. In the case of Star Wars, I'll go out on a limb and say that Star Wars III will probably be the highest grossing and, hopefully, best of the 2 trilogies. Its potential is unlimited since it is THE ONE that ties everything together.

***

Regarding Activision's lawsuit against Viacom, their contention that Viacom is not marketing the Star Trek franchise agressively enough is much like the old adage, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder". The only way, of course, that this lawsuit will be settled will be to determine what specific responsibilities Viacom had with regards to marketing the franchise. Did the contract call for a specific number of new shows and movies over its 10-year life span? Your guess is as good as mine. My gut feeling is that Activision realizes that they made a mistake in agreeing to a contract for such a long term (10 years) and is looking for a way to cash out quickly, in order to possibly placate their share-holders.

***

I saved the games for last only because I am probably the only person in the world that doesn't have some type of game machine. I haven't seen or played any of the games that have come out.

BST :)

[Dawg]

I saved the games for last only because I am probably the only person in the world that doesn't have some type of game machine. I haven't seen or played any of the games that have come out.

Neither do I, BST. My son-in-law has an X-Box, though.

I am
Dawg
:warrior:

[Sorrento]

Originally posted by BST
Sorrento,

I actually liked ENT when it first aired and watched nearly the 1st season without interruption. Then, other commitments kept getting in the way and my Wednesday night TV viewing habits basically went out the window. I haven't seen much of the 2nd season although, I would like to go back and see what I've missed.


There is nothing wrong in a person who doesn't have time for TV... I wish I could stop watching it for that matter; it literally kills between 5 to 7 hours each week for me, if not more. At least the few series I have "adopted" are very good: Enterprise, G. Girls, Everwood, Monk, CSI (not Miami of course).

As for the second season, I tell you there is a lot to watch there. There we see Romulans, or don't see them for that matter, for the first time. Also we see the true nature of what Vulcans were 150 years before Kirk and Spock, and also the second of humanity's best friends: Andorians. The series has separated a little bit from the changeling Cabal faction and is exploring other "alternatives to been killed".


To paraphrase what I mentioned earlier, watching a prequel is a bit anti-climactic because you know what will eventually happen in the overall storyline. What I enjoy and what would keep my interest in a prequel is the actual journey in getting to the present day, i.e., ENT eventually getting to the ST:TOS timeframe. In the case of Star Wars, I'll go out on a limb and say that Star Wars III will probably be the highest grossing and, hopefully, best of the 2 trilogies. Its potential is unlimited since it is THE ONE that ties everything together.


This is where we share almost the exact point of view. The only "trick" to capture the audience is the trip between then and here as you said. With Star Wars is very dificult because they have to build new characters, new cultures, new planets in just 2 hours while Enterprise has more time to do so. Worse for Star Wars is that everything they write about is going to disapear probably; Naboo, Jedis, Trade Federation, and others.

Yes, hopefully SW III (hope its name is not as bad as the two before) is going to be a land mark in the saga. My hopes are not that big because G. Lucas has proven not to be that good writer we thought he was in the 1980's... or he was just making a bad story in the first two movies in order to give SW III a lot of attention, which in the end says the same thing.

With Enterprise the third season will have a diferent aproach, so they say at startrek.com. The producers didn't like the 1/3 drop in ratings and they planned a change of a big magnitud; this is what I fear the most, because not only a "big war with an unknown enemy" is already cooking but a bunch of federation marines or soldiers have joined the crew. I don't like wars, I prefer to watch about how to avoid them than how they are fought, and this would probably make the series bad in my opinion, but alas maybe this is what the US audience is looking for... hopefully the change would not stop the good writing so it will remain ok for both.


Regarding Activision's lawsuit against Viacom, their contention that Viacom is not marketing the Star Trek franchise agressively enough is much like the old adage, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder". The only way, of course, that this lawsuit will be settled will be to determine what specific responsibilities Viacom had with regards to marketing the franchise. Did the contract call for a specific number of new shows and movies over its 10-year life span? Your guess is as good as mine. My gut feeling is that Activision realizes that they made a mistake in agreeing to a contract for such a long term (10 years) and is looking for a way to cash out quickly, in order to possibly placate their share-holders.


Yes, you got it! If I put myself in their shoes (share holders) I would probably dislike the idea of making millions instead of billions (the quantities are variable). They started their 10 year contract with green pastures, but ended up with a dry one. The Video Game market is getting narrow each day, with the release of dozens of games each week... to keep competing is very dificult for anyone, even the giant Activision, so maybe they are willing to step aside from the Star Trek franchise and stay with sports or something; I am sure even the other games they released haven't been that successfull since Return to Castle Wolfenstein.


I saved the games for last only because I am probably the only person in the world that doesn't have some type of game machine. I haven't seen or played any of the games that have come out.

BST :)

You are not the only one. To be able to run one of these games (Elite Force 2, Medal of Honor, Splinter Cell) you need a very powerful system alright, and today as it was in 1990 to have a PC of such caracteristics is very expensive. You need a good Pentium IV (if its 2.6+ ghz @ 800 mhz is better), a great amount of fast RAM (512+ mb of dual DDR333 at least, DDR400 if its @800 mhz) and a very good video card (from Ti4200 to the sky is the limit). Go cheap like I did and run an AMD instead, but its a handicap eventually.

With that system alone we are talking about $700+ USD, $1000 if you go all the way and get an FX5900 video card (expensive but will keep you safe for a lot more years). And then this is just half the PC, but at least you will experience all the new games in NON stroboscopic action, like with a slower PC. I just fixed a friend's notebook, HP, which can run all those games very decently... but it cost $1,500 usd.

An XBox is an extraordinary machine, my nephew has one and the games run very well in it. Aparently Microsoft DX8.1 runs on the XBox too, so games from both PC and XBox are shared now.

Games don't cost $29.95 as they say in the store, they cost $1,500 + $29.95, or $199.95 + $45.99 in the XBox. What you need is to know somebody with one of these evil machines and go play Elite Force II with him/her... I did that in the past. :D

Sorrento