The Pho
A heck of a paleontologist if I do say so myself
- Joined
- May 9, 2018
Well I am not sure we totally disagree...
First Rogue One was extremely good but was based on story line that was created with the major stars - so there was pull.
Plus as you say there are books, and animated features and such that are sucessful
Star Trek I will disagree with a bit - of all the Star Trek versions the only versions successful was Main and Next Gen. Animated didn't last long, and other TV versions faded quickly. I will add that Next Gen kept success by getting rubs from main characters of original movie. The reboot to me was extremely well done, not just due to actor choices but keeping a similar theme and tie in to first version.
As for Indy, we have to wait and see, what leeks from what this next one is. I believe whole heartedly that if done correct this franchise could keep going.
Off the record - I desperately want a theme park with Star Trek...I can't tell you how much I wish someone would do it.
We’re not that far apart.
I’m not a huge Star Trek person, but I also would love a full recreation of one of the Enterprises as a land somewhere, that has serious potential. And every so often we hear rumors of negotiations somewhere between Vegas, Universal, Cedar Fair, etc...
But I think it’s hard to argue that Star Trek hasn’t found success beyond those original characters, even if you dislike the moves they’ve made, they succeeded. Isn’t the original the shortest lived show of the franchise apart from the original’s cartoon spin off? It lasted 3 years vs 7 for Next Gen, 7 for Voyager, 7 for Deep Space Nine, 4 for Enterprise, and at least 3 for Discovery currently. Even for shows I don’t like, I can’t argue against them succeeding if they last 7 years. Perhaps not as known as the original, but there’s more to success. Certainly they wouldn’t have continued producing episodes and new series if everything post the original was a failure.