Star Trek 4 (1 Viewer)

[Tino]

My oldest grandson (15yo) will watch the occasional episode but he's not devoted to it and never asks to see an episode. He regularly asks to watch episodes of I Love Lucy, Leave it to Beaver, and Gilligan's Island but never any drama programs from that era of broadcasting (he's seen episodes of several - Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Mannix, Hawaii 5-O, The Wild Wild West, and a few others). He seems to enjoy it when he watches an episode with me so maybe there's hope and I just need to get the right episode(s) for him to take interest.

His oldest sister (12yo) has seen a few episodes of TNG and never asks to see it. If that's what I'm watching she usually leaves the room after 15-20 minutes.

Their sister (7yo) will watch complete episodes of TNG with me but I don't think she's seen any TOS. However, she, like her brother and sister, never ask to watch any Trek. That could easily change if I watched enough of it with her.

All three generally ask for comedy series from the 60s and I'm OK with that as my preference leans in that direction but I'd really like to get them interested in some of the better dramatic series, especially Star Trek.

Their mom, my daughter (39yo), never watched Trek. She might now but I just don't know. I'd have to loan her some seasons with a "watch some and let me know" mandate.

My son (36yo) has watched episodes of TOS, TNG, and DS9. He didn't care for any of them. But he's never been too interested in anything SF related - other than Star Wars (and he's a huge SW fan - skipped school, with our permission, to sit in line to purchase a ticket for the Episode 1 premier at the local theater).

No one I work with (ages ~22-39) watches anything Trek. Most watch the Marvel and DC superhero movies bit didn't bother with any of the "New Trek" movies, much less the older stuff.

I know 2 people who like and watch Star Trek. One is in his late 40s (likes it all), the other in his mid 50s (only likes TNG).

I can similarly post opposite examples. Hence my anecdotal statement.

 

[Tino]

Beyond did the least of all three by a substantial amount.

Yeah I think we all know that as it has been regurgitated repeatedly all over this thread.

 

[Jason_V]

My only point in saying it is to show the last movie made the least money of all of them. It doesn't matter what they do as a whole. It matters what the last one did.

Recounting the $1.2 billion gross as "relevance" isn't, in fact, relevant.

 

[Tino]

My only point in saying it is to show the last movie made the least money of all of them. It doesn't matter what they do as a whole. It matters what the last one did.

Recounting the $1.2 billion gross as "relevance" isn't, in fact, relevant.

I disagree.

 

[Tino]

And opinions on relevance are subjective of course. Imo, Star Trek has always been relevant and continues to be. Just look at the passion of the posts in this thread.

 

[Gary Seven]

As one who has been developing software for over 35 years, in the 80's, every software developer I knew was into Star Trek. In fact, during that time, one job interview I had consisted entirely of talking about Star Trek. I got the job. This continued for the most part into the 90s'. As time went on, that lessened. Now, the millennials I work with have no interest in Star Trek and only one other person I work with has an interest in Star Trek Discovery. From my perspective, the geeky world is less interested in Star Trek than it once was.

 

[Jason_V]

And opinions on relevance are subjective of course. Imo, Star Trek has always been relevant and continues to be. Just look at the passion of the posts in this thread.

Not really. TOS was relevant since it was a "big budget" sci fi show with adult ideas. TNG was relevant being the first syndicated sci fi show (and a break out hit). DS9 and VOY were relevant since they advanced the way Trek does storytelling and diversified the lead characters. ENT was even relevant with some of the stories it put into pop culture.

I adore the 2009 movie...but what did it do? What did STID do? How many people, for good or bad, are talking about Beyond? When Beyond made only 28.71% of the total reboot gross box office with higher ticket prices, that means fewer people paid to see the movie. That isn't relevance. That's irrelevance.

Paramount spinning their wheels on STID, it's lackluster marketing campaign for STB and whatever they're doing now proves irrelevance. If ST was relevant to Paramount, this film franchise would be front and center. It's not.

ST is relevant to those of us here not because of the reboot or Discovery. It's because of everything that came before. I watch the reboot and Discovery BECAUSE it's Trek; they won't be anyone's "gateway drug" into the franchise.

 

[JQuintana]

Like I said to a certain age group it probably still has relevance, but to the under 50ish crowd most likely could do without it. I don't ever hear friends or co-workers ever saying "Are you going to the new Start Trek!?" or "Did watch (fill in blank ST series) last night!!" I don't think I've heard any kind of buzz like that since maybe back when Start Trek 3 came out. It just seems so off most folks radar now.

 

[Tino]

I get what you’re saying Jason. I just don’t agree with your opinions.

 

[Tino]

When Beyond made only 28.71% of the total reboot gross box office

By the way how did you arrive at this number?

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

From Boxofficemojo.com

Worldwide (Unadjusted)
Rank Title (click to view) Studio Worldwide Domestic / % Overseas / % Year
1 Star Trek Into Darkness Par. $467.4 $228.8 48.9% $238.6 51.1% 2013
2 Star Trek Par. $385.7 $257.7 66.8% $128.0 33.2% 2009
3 Star Trek Beyond Par. $343.5 $158.8 46.2% $184.6 53.8% 2016


https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

By the way how did you arrive at this number?

He's saying that Star Trek Beyond accounts for 28.7% of the total gross of the combined three reboot pictures.

 

[AndyMcKinney]

So how relevant and popular is Star Trek to the under 50+ crowd at this point? It seems most folks under say 50 or so have no real desire to invest in watching this series of TV shows or movies or is it still a huge seller to Millennial's and other similar groups?

I've tried to sell the the older movies and the original series to my 10 year old and he thinks they are "dumb". I'm guessing his friends think similarly.

I work with an "elder millennial" (she's over 30) and she has never seen any incarnation of Trek, ever. And, before anybody says, "well, she's a girl", this is a gal who is into just about every "geek" thing out there...she's way into videogames, comics, manga, sci-fi, the lot. The movies/shows have just never been on her radar. She has considered watching Discovery, as you don't really have to know anything about established history to watch it.

I think it's about the same with many of the younger (18-21) ones I know. It's something they're aware of, but nothing they have any sort of connection to.

 

[Tino]

He's saying that Star Trek Beyond accounts for 28.7% of the total gross of the combined three reboot pictures.

Yeah. That’s what I figured but wasn’t sure.

 

[Jason_V]

He's saying that Star Trek Beyond accounts for 28.7% of the total gross of the combined three reboot pictures.

Thank you, Neil.

 

[Chris Will]

He's saying that Star Trek Beyond accounts for 28.7% of the total gross of the combined three reboot pictures.

But saying that, and not mentioning the other percentages, is a little misleading and is just trying to make STB look worse.

Using the same math the 2009 reboot only accounted for about 33% of the total reboot gross. STID was around 39%. So, when placed in context, STB doesn’t look as bad, especially when compared to the 2009 film.

 

[Jason_V]

But saying that, and not mentioning the other percentages, is a little misleading and is just trying to make STB look worse.

Using the same math the 2009 reboot only accounted for about 33% of the total reboot gross. STID was around 39%. So, when placed in context, STB doesn’t look as bad, especially when compared to the 2009 film.

It doesn't look as bad? The movie cost just shy of STID's budget and brought less money in. And that was with higher ticket prices in 2016 than in 2013.

This conversation all started whether Trek is still relevant. Judging by the number of people who saw the the last movie, I'm sticking with no...at least it's not relevant to the greater pop culture universe.

 

[Tino]

Judging by the number of people who saw the the last movie,

I don’t think that’s a good barometer to measure the relevance or lack thereof of Star Trek. As has been mentioned the first two were moderately successful in the end and there are plenty of new Star Trek shows in development. Would there be if it weren’t still relevant? I don’t think so. As I said Star Trek will always be relevant imo.

There is no absolute answer. Just our opinions. Agree to disagree.

 

[Malcolm R]

Based on tickets sold (from BO Mojo), there was a significant drop in tickets sold for each movie:

Star Trek (2009) - 34.5 million tix
ST: Into Darkness - 27.3 million tix
ST: Beyond - 18.6 million tix

I think Trek is still relevant, just not in the form of a $200m budget feature film, which is likely why there are more options being developed in other formats.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I can only speak for myself, so this isn't a scientific data point or anything, but I saw the 2009 movie in theaters twice. I only saw the other two once each. So, in addition to people who dropped off in between films, there might have been less repeat viewing from the people who came back.