Yes... and here's the reason why; writers are contracted to failure by an industrial gimmick so complex that even producers & directors can scrap the essential from written words of perceived value by interpretation & a recipe stirred enough to create chaos where order should be.

If J.K Rowlings signed up on the Harry Potter series, it's because a Novel isn't a Film and that books must be read rather than exploited *towards* a secondary market.

If Jim Cameron made Titanic, it's because the hooking of crowds paid up more than once.

If Steven Spielberg took on any projects for solid potential, it's because costs must equal ticket sales.

If Ian Fleming wrote in the 50's, it proves James Bond is alive, driving & charming.

They'd want innovation? They should invest in cyclic but regenerated talent rather than match a free-market with dollar figures or face smiles or perpetual remakes or old comics (Yes, Sin City i'm talkin' to YOU directly) or, etc.

The main problem with such results is that Domestic & Foreign sales aren't nearly as high (or reasonably matched) as they should be.

All Sci-Fi slots confused, Star Trek was and still is the reference to measure up with including *ANY* worthy competition. Nerdy geeks aside, i can't imagine where, for example, the fantasy in LOTR or even SW were more entertaining than real space exploration.

Biased or not, i think the vast majority in the public prefer casual tricks (admitedly, through personal preferences or commonly accepted "trends") to being challenged intellectually by solid characters (to identify with, btw) & extremely complex storytelling.

I agree, but when the highest grossing ST movie until now had not even passed the $150M mark (First Contact FYI) then I'll take what number STXI is getting as a shot in the arm and even though it still does not do the franchise justice nor play on any even ground that the rest of the box office smash hits wrestle on, it still bodes well for the ST world when compared to it's predecessor's.

It's certainly no secret that the movie going public has been loath to embrace Star Trek and prefer the tricks and spoils of a pirate or a wizard. But it's the hand Star Trek is dealt and i for one am happy to see it finally perform at a level that will, without doubt, see greater success for the franchise.

Huge box office totals for the rest notwithstanding...300M+ for a Star Trek is just as good as 1B for a pirate movie.

Just more FYI's though....

Star Trek is tallying well in comparison to other summer releases.

Both Terminator Salvation and Angels and Demons are both well under expectation (ST has outsold Terminator nearly 3 to 1 and all but matched Angles and Demons as well as Wolverine) and the new X-Men movie, though matching X-Men (the first one) has come in well under its expected take, so much so that the franchise is in serious doubt.

Star Trek has broke expectation and has secured a future for the franchise, within one month of release. I'd say in comparison to it's summer competitors, the numbers though not by any means a Hollywood bonanza, look pretty damn good to Abrams and Paramount.

I guess, they'll HAVE to seriously consider a return to TeeVee after or in between STXII & STXIII with such a success at the BO.

DVD sales helping, i'd gamble with you (ENT-1234 in mint conditions, possibly!) that many precious contracts are being discussed right now and the toughest case to sign will be Chris Pine; wanna know why?

1) Karl Urban would want his name in the opening generic too (trivia, but true)!

2) Scripts are dumping on multiple executive desks, right now.

3) Quinto nailed Spock as incredibly right as the original eye-browsey trick of the best.

4) The captain's chair fits much more than a reboot - it's a revolution in *Cinematography*.

5) None of the above.

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

Quinto's spock is....Spock. I was completley sold be him and by movies end, i couldn't tell the difference between Nimoy (cira '66) and Quinto.

A return to TV after a successful run of movies will undoubtably be all ready being discussed. (i hang out on alot of movie/tv forums and it's been thrown around there too)

Other arguments i have heard over why Pine would not want to be locked into a lengthy TV deal, or movie deal for that matter, is that he doesn't want to be typecast as Kirk. I don't buy this argument, firstly, if one is to be typecast i could think of no better character, but i am biased, but mainly, ask the TJ Hooker or Boston Legal fans if William Shatner has been typecast as Captain James T Kirk.

Star Trek 12 has already been announced and is in studio planning, slated for 2011 release (but expect that to be pushed to summer fo 2012) and if the studios is smart, they have the main cast locked to a 3 movie deal.

well, the borg as in the original conception were a faviourite star trek enemy of mine, so I would be happy to see them again. but I don't think we will this in any movie for a long, long time, because I cannot think of any reason why we would see them sooner in the trek timeline and I'm somehow excluding a new timeline picard and co here.

that said, as a more precise answer to your question: sure, the federation will meet the borg at some point, assuming the federation is not conquered or something else before it happens. yet, when that point is, is impossible to tell. I'd tend to roughly same time as Q Who or later, since that was about the time frame that the borg came to vicinity of federation space. without Q's intervention it would probably have taken a few more years, maybe some few decades (there were transported several decades off)

and don't get me started on the cycle and that signal. I don't care, for me it's technobabble, since time-travel is just ridiculous.

It should also be noted that 'Q' essentially functions OUTSIDE time and space.  So the changes made to the timeline would not affect 'Q'. 

Yes, and the time-loop is essentially self-sustaining: as long as it exists, it makes sense. To start it, you need a power that can move freely through time...... hmmmmmmmmm......  sound familliar....

Personally I'd rather expand on other races that really haven't been touched yet such as the Tholians

Ohhhh yeah, that would be nice...

Reflects inflation of ticket prices, as well as what John Stewart once said, "The lowering of discourse is done with tenacity."

The movie was awful- one hodgepodge action sequence after the next-- Nothing to look forward to in this "new direction" at all. Americans / the rest of the world must be bored to freaking tears and depressed beyond belief if this is their $311 million dollar escape.... then again, what's $300 million anymore?

/rant

DrGonzo

Nausicans might be interesting too. And the Orion Syndicate never really got a lot of screen time either

ENT -- In a Mirror, Darkly revealed much about them to the Empire Earth crew, though. To quote a Phlox's alterego comment; "Would you kindly die?" from heat exposition.

I'd enjoy a more thorough episode with the Inter-Galactic Nacene (VOY, second caretaker) since TOS also had some of that concept covered in By any other name where the usual reds were simply turned into foam  objects crushed to death.

I truly think that the new movie put new life into a dying franchise it showed a more gritty Star trek then the usual right and wrong movies like the last movie, because life is shades of gray not just black and white as the next gen protrayed with ships that are so clean and people that are so perfect that even a silly android wanted to be human, Babylon 5 showed more faces of the human goals and conditions then voyger, next generation and even deep space 9. 

All I can say is that the producer of the new movie nailed it and I can only hope that another movie using the same crew and ships is in the making          

Well, if that's the proportional thinking you wanna use which of these three films has to be considered the most successful of ALL time; Gone With the Wind or Wizard of Oz or E.T?

Please do evaluate true population numbers too and how many theaters or available seats per day compiled the ticket prices against or for reasonably precise potential; i'll even make it easy on you with proof.

300+? Only? So far?

Oh, well -- have you showed UP (a familiar Disney/Pixar trick of animation -- whatta coincidence, again) with 2.75$ or less to Blade Runner or Rocky III or Tootsie or Wrath Of Khan in 82?

Strange what 27 years of fairplay competition can generate in inflated values, popular or not.

Reactions sequencing by Abrams & the likes, this summer is long and Michael Bay awaits or rather magically wanded his Harry's way into the gamble as usual.

Over what....the 7 years to the last ST movie or the 13 to the most successful ST movie? Either way, the inflation of ticket prices in that time frame is not indicitive of the amount of box office performance we have seen from the lastets movie.Inflation has not had that much of an affect.

But....Lets take inflation into account then. First contact, roughly with inflation would go from $146M to near $190M an increase of close to 1/3rd its total box office take. That still leaves it ~$100M behind the new movie!

Thats gotta be seen as a win no matter what way you look at it, personal opinions aside. Now i'll grant that DVD sales are likely not to perform to ths same level as it has at the box office, piracy is sure to take its toll there, as i'm sure it has at the cinema's, but it's still a resounding commercial success.

It's been announced, which usually means some lawyer in LA has petitioned for rights to and financing for the film, for a release some time in 2011.

Don't expect it before summer 2012 though.

It is unfortunate that Transformers 2 is following so closely on the heels of Star Trek. It's run may hvae gone on longer without such a blockbuster following so close, but i expect it do do another 20-25 million by the end of June.