XPost: rec.arts.movies.current-films, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: john-duncan-yoyo@cox.net   
      
   On Mon, 03 May 2004 01:42:53 GMT, Michael Johnson    
   wrote:   
      
   >On Sun, 02 May 2004 18:25:55 -0400, John Duncan Yoyo   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sun, 02 May 2004 20:13:20 GMT, Michael Johnson    
   >>wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>Lets go with ST as your example. Their fanbase before ST:TMP was made   
   >>>was the same 'loyal but devoted' fans that plugged for a film. It was   
   >>>only until the release of that movie and the subsequent sequels that   
   >>>the fanbase became more mainstream enough to warrant ST:TNG.   
   >>   
   >>IMS ST:TMP was not all that successful. Wrath of Kahn was the   
   >>successful one.  It was sort of a surprise when ST:WoK arrived in   
   >>theaters and was a great Star Trek film.   
   >   
   >In terms of story and being the cornerstone for the modern franchise..   
   >yes I would agree that WoK was the more successful. In terms of money   
   >generated by a Star Trek film.. First Contact is #1 and  ST:TMP is #2.   
      
   Is that in constant value dollars?  I'd prefer a count of buts in the   
   seats for this sort of measure.   
   >   
   >The Wrath of Khan is #6, having made around $50 million less than The   
   >Motion Picture.   
      
   As someone else has pointed out ST:TMP had huge costs associated with   
   it which made it less profitable than WoK.  IMS Paramount was   
   reluctant to make a second Trek film but they did it cheaper and   
   better the second time around.   
      
   ST:TMP is better on the DVD reedited release.  They tuned up the   
   special effects and recut it a bit here and there.   
   --   
   John Duncan Yoyo   
   ------------------------------o)   
   Brought to you by the Binks for Senate campaign comittee.   
   Coruscant is far, far away from wesa on Naboo.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)