Has the wing commander movie killed the franchise?

[Mekt-Hakkikt]

Hey, I can post pictures too.

(...)

Am I really the only person that thinks that the WC 4 Kilrathi look better than the ones in WC3? I think that the WC3 Kilrathi look like giant apes and not feline at all.

 

[frostytheplebe]

Am I really the only person that thinks that the WC 4 Kilrathi look better than the ones in WC3? I think that the WC3 Kilrathi look like giant apes and not feline at all.

... no it was the other way around for me to be honest.

 

[Mace]

Am I really the only person that thinks that the WC 4 Kilrathi look better than the ones in WC3? I think that the WC3 Kilrathi look like giant apes and not feline at all.

I think the Melek Mask looks like some kind of retarded kilrathi as opposed to his in-FMV variant.

 

[Farbourne]

I'm one of the first to denigrate certain aspects of the movie, but I'm actually surprised to hear some people so negative about (1) Lilliard, and (2) the special effects.

My impression when I first saw the movie was, as much as they struck out in casting Freddie Prinze Jr. in the lead, they hit a home run (or at least a double) by casting Lilliard as Maniac. He was exactly as I pictured Maniac might have been before he first got to the Claw, and I thought his whole acting in the Rosie sub-plot was superb. With the possible exception of Angel, his was my favorite acting on any character in the movie.

And the special effects (excepting the Kilrathi, and the blatant violations of physics...but it's a low-budged action/adventure sci-fi movie, so who's counting?) were one of the things that definitely worked. They were pretty, polished, and successfully conveyed what the movie-makers wanted to.

I gripe about many things (largely in the writing, editing, and Freddie Prinze Jr. categories), but I'll be the first to give props to what I liked about the movie.

 

[AD]

... excepting the Kilrathi, and the blatant violations of physics...

See, this I don't quite get. The only real law of physics that gets broken here is sound in space. People rattle on about this and that but that's litterally the only real one (ok, two if you can't get your head around how fighter might dip at the end of the flight deck) in the film. And honestly, what sci fi movie (outside of 2001) doesn't use sound in space? It hardly seems fair to gripe about the WC movie for sound in space - and no, the "sonar" scene doesn't count since there's absolutely nothing to indicate they're actually concerned about litterally being heard. Paladin's 'shush' is because there's still a destroyer hunting them and their celebration is premature, not because of some crazy idea that they might be heard. This is some kind of sensor ping, not actual sound waves in space.

The intention is definitely to reference the old submarine movies, as is the intention of the whole damn movie to reference various old WW2 sub/fighter plane/battleship movies. Even the fighter dips are a stylistic-though-ultimately-misguided attempt at this. But the wreckage certainly isn't an example of this same thing. It get's pushed off to the side of the flight deck - not the end - where there is obviously some kind of artificial gravity.

 

[PopsiclePete]

Even the fighter dips are a stylistic-though-ultimately-misguided attempt at this.

Am I the only one who actually loved the small dip of the fighters at launch ? I thought it works beautifully, and it also made sense to me... considering they use some kind of artificial gravity generator, there is no way the effect of that generator would not expand a few meters beyond the floor. The fighter dips a bit while getting off the zone of effect of the artificial gravity, then gets free of it.

 

[ChrisReid]

Am I the only one who actually loved the small dip of the fighters at launch ? I thought it works beautifully, and it also made sense to me... considering they use some kind of artificial gravity generator, there is no way the effect of that generator would not expand a few meters beyond the floor. The fighter dips a bit while getting off the zone of effect of the artificial gravity, then gets free of it.

That's exactly my take on it.

 

[AD]

Am I the only one who actually loved the small dip of the fighters at launch ? I thought it works beautifully, and it also made sense to me... considering they use some kind of artificial gravity generator, there is no way the effect of that generator would not expand a few meters beyond the floor. The fighter dips a bit while getting off the zone of effect of the artificial gravity, then gets free of it.

I actually like them, but it's one of those things that gets latched on to for some reason when people decide to rant on the film no matter what plausible explinations we might come up with for it. That was what I meant by misguided.

 

[Quarto]

Eh, as much as I like that little dip, it is a perfectly valid criticism from other people. There's a difference between us, going to see the Wing Commander movie, and between other people, going to see some movie called Wing Commander. People from that second category (and that's most of the planet) are not going to get into deep analysis of how gravity generation on a spaceship would work - they simply see an obvious attempt to reference WWII in an obviously non-WWII environment.

In short, it is understandable that people would notice this. The real problem with this kind of criticism, though, is not that there's some explanation that justifies it, but simply the fact that it's a half-a-second special effects sequence, and if someone lets that ruin their movie experience, then they'll always find something to hate.

 

[NinjaLA]

The fighters were awesome even the first time I watched the film. It never even occurred to me to dislike the fighter dip, or the broadsides or any of those little details when I watched the movie.

None of my movie (now reformed) hate existed until some internet mook told me that I shouldn't like it. I like to think that I am a little better than that now.

 

[AD]

It was a religion? I thought they were a human sub-species, who have special abilities that help them navigate in space better than normal humans.

Well, the genetic differences (of which there were a number of different abilities) are only a subset of why people hate Pilgrims. (I personally think calling them 'pilgrims' was actually worse on people's perception of the film than the actual idea of pilgrims).

Anyway, the main reason Pilgrims are hated isn't their abilities but rather their ideals and beliefs. Paladin explains as much to Blair part way into the film. They believe the universe belongs to them and think they're superior to Humans *and* Kilrathi. They would really like to see Confed and the Kilrathi kill eachother off. Some of this was lost when the traitor subplot got cut but the ideas are all still there. "They believed they were gods."

A lot of this is expanded in the novels though. THe movie novelization includes all the Pilgrim traitor subplot stuff. It's actually extremely close to the shooting script with very little minor characterization stuff added in. Various background characters get named etc etc. And there's an epilogue that leads into the Pilgrim Stars novel. Pilgrim Stars delves into the Pilgrim history a lot more, Basically by the end of the unpublished Pilgrim Truth novel, it would have explained why they are latter inconcequential to the WC universe.

Basically the Pilgrim belief system led to a rift between them and regular humans, which let to a bloody (civil?) war. The regular humans won. The left over pilgrims are bitter, and subjected to a lot of hatred as evidenced in the film. Their particular abilites were never really at issue, though I imagine just having the abilites would lead to mistrust. THe film goes out of it's way to show this, I think (It's not faith, It's genetics). It seems fairly evident in the way the thing that is common with all the Pilgrim characters is that they carry a symbol of it - A cross. Sansky has one, Wilson has one, Blair has one, and Paladin has one, though technically Paladin isn't a pilgrim IIRC.

 

[Tooner623]

Eh, as much as I like that little dip, it is a perfectly valid criticism from other people. There's a difference between us, going to see the Wing Commander movie, and between other people, going to see some movie called Wing Commander. People from that second category (and that's most of the planet) are not going to get into deep analysis of how gravity generation on a spaceship would work - they simply see an obvious attempt to reference WWII in an obviously non-WWII environment.

This.

I enjoy the movie. Heck, I've even got an original poster I snatched up from a local theater hanging in my apartment (my girlfriend is always amused that *I* am the one with a Freddie Prinze Jr. poster hanging around).

That said, the movie isn't good. The plot holes are there, the WWII devices don't work, the pilgrim plot is underdeveloped, and, yes, the "never existed" bit simply doesn't work in the context of the film. The reason for that is that we have to *explain it.*

It's like a good joke. If you have to explain a joke, it isn't good. It's the same rule of thumb with a movie. I know, and most people reading here know, about the cut traitor plot. But the average viewer? They don't. Thus, the pilgrim plot is undeveloped.

I know, and some people reading here know, that the "never existed" bit is a nod to the WWII films the movie is trying to emulate. But the average viewer? They don't. And since the cutting in that scene (and the movie in general) is atrocious, that element comes off just all wrong.

I know that they aren't *technically* looking for "sound in space, but the average viewer can't get their head around that.

I know that the gravity well probably extends past the ship, but the average viewer doesn't.

It's not one of these things, it's ALL of these things. It's a bad movie. I enjoy it. I have fun watching it, as a fan of Wing Commander and as someone who has read the supplemental materials, but no one should ever be EXPECTED to read supplemental materials to have a movie make sense. It's the reason that Star Wars Episode III's General Grievous doesn't work. I shouldn't have to watch the Clone Wars miniseries to understand why there is a coughing robot with four lightsabers that everyone is afraid of, but who goes down kind of easily.

A film has to stand on its own, especially if it is not a sequel or prequel to another film. But even then, it should stand on its own. There's a reason that The Godfather II is considered the best sequel ever made. It can be watched without prior knowledge (though it helps). While we're on that track, I didn't have to read The Godfather book to understand what happened in its film adaptation.

You should never have to explain a good movie, or a good joke. You should never have to make excuses for it. The movie's biggest problems aren't "nerd rage." The movie's biggest problem is simply the fact that its underdeveloped.

Also, every person who has seen the movie that I've met who hasn't played the games has felt rather gypped by the "one ship at a time that we can easily blow up" ending. Yeah, they explain why in the movie, but I think after all the OTHER genuinely cool and well done battles in the movie, some people at least expected one more for the road, so to speak.

 

[LeHah]

Eh, as much as I like that little dip, it is a perfectly valid criticism from other people.

I don't think you can make statement about "valid criticism" toward a media genre that now has people saying frak.

 

[ChanceKell]

I don't think you can make statement about "valid criticism" toward a media genre that now has people saying frak.

Where have you been for the past thirty-one years? "Frak" has been a part of scifi since BSG originally hit the scene.

 

[t.c.cgi]

No. No, it really hasn't.

 

[ChanceKell]

No. No, it really hasn't.

Puh-lease. I remember being a young little Wingnut and trying to pass "frak" by my parents after seeing it on the original Galactica. I suppose it's a good thing it didn't go over well, because I wouldn't want to be one of the kids these days using that pseudo-curse -- using "frak" is more worn out than Mark Hamill's voice acting. (zing!)

 

[LeHah]

Where have you been for the past thirty-one years? "Frak" has been a part of scifi since BSG originally hit the scene.

It was said for the majority of those years with a sense of irony, for those that remembered a show that lasted two seasons and faded into obscurity.

Now its said by dumb internet people who think it makes them sound smart, like a secret handshake for the mentally disabled.

 

[Mace]

Well, Frak was only used a few times, there was another expression that relates to "crap", far more often used(I need to look it up)


And that series, the re-envisioning was not that big of a success.

Offtopic: for those interested
In 1999, they were going to do a direct continuation of the 1978/1979 series(disgarding the 1980 landing on earth thingie); BSG: Second coming.
It got cancelled in favor of the re-envisioned BSG, while a lot of actors from the original series, reprised their roles. A lot of designs were recycled in the the new BSG after the project got cancelled; here is the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIyzTO4zhU (and THAT would have been the show hardcore fans would have wanted to see)

 

[t.c.cgi]

I remember being a young little Wingnut and trying to pass "frak" by my parents after seeing it on the original Galactica.

That's great. But that's not evidence that frak was some huge phenomenon or that it continued to be one until the reboot.

 

[Kevin Farlander]

I don't see how a movie can kill a franchise that already had a strong (perhaps) medium (video game) otherwise.

Interesting points you bring up Tooner623. You got me thinking into all the negative movie experiences I've had with some of the points below.

Think about some of the video games, or better still, comic books that have survived, (in some cases, numerous) movie failings...but just plain keep on trucking right along.

Will stick with video games for now...actually, no we won't, because comic books were at one time as popular as video games. And naturally, they inspired movies. Good or bad...those comics are still as popular as ever.

Lets start with Superman. First two movies were great. Third haven't seen. Next we had Superman IV: The Quest For Peace (A movie for you, Tooner623). Did the franchise die? Of course not...it had all those comic books to fall back on to. And the comics are still popular. Recently, we've seen a revival in a movie (Although it lost a ton at the box office), and soon another reboot.

Next we have Batman. First two movies, great. Next movie, saw-it-and-forgot-it. Batman and Robin...(Another movie for you, Tooner623). Franchise keeps right on going, through comic books and a recent movie(s) revival.

Then we have Spawn. One of my brothers favorite comics...and least favorite movies (STILL another movie for you, Tooner623). Johhny L from Super Mario Bros (as a...CLOWN) was the best thing about it. The guy who played Spawn and Martin Sheen both walked through their roles like zombies. Franchise keeps right on going through comic books as well. I hope someday it gets another movie.

I think you've seen my point. There have been numerous franchises (video games and comics that just couldn't cut it at the movie level. None of the franchises have died, at least not yet.

Superman
Batman
Punisher (THREE different [failed] attempts to create a franchise, movie wise)
The Hulk (Two failed attempts, despite the presence of FLASH himself)
Spawn

Super Mario Bros
Street Fighter
Final Fantasy

Are ANY of the above dead? Of course not. Again, they've got strong enough built in fan bases to keep them alive as video games or comics. They obviously don't have the same fan base for movies, however. Add to that some of them were pretty bad as movies...but it's not going to kill the franchise off by any means.

So why is Wing Commander dead? I think the problem is that there was a decline in the games sales after and even before WC III, again, long before the movies.

Thinking back to my own experience with trying to get the third game...there were problems. I remember my dad having to go all over the place back in about '96 and maybe '97 to get the third game. I had to have it after borrowing it off a friend for a while. And maybe that should have been a hint as well. I remember wondering why a game so popular would be so hard to find. We did get it eventually. Then when we got WCIV, I remember being a little amazed that we got it for such a low price. I can't remember how much exactly...but believe me it was low. SIX CDs, and the game have only been out, maybe less than 18 months. Then I got Prophecy when it first came out. The same friend who lent me III said, "Don't play it. I played the first 6 missions and got bored with it. It's the worst Wing Commander game I've played". Ouch. That because this friend was a serious game buff and I wondered if I'd like it. I played it once, beginning to end, and while I didn't hate it...I remember feeling like it was a let down.

Looking back, was this all a sign that the games were in decline? I know, this was just my experience...none of these things happen to anyone else, right?

But still...wasn't WCIV a disappointment, sales wise? I know the game cost somewhere around 10 million to make, and apparently, while the games did sell a lot, it was not enough to make that much profit. I think Prophecy didn't reach what was hoped for either. That's probably why they stopped the original Wing Commander storyline.

Then, what about the spin off games (With the exception of Privateer). Didn't Academy, Armada and even the recent Arena fail to reach expectations? See usually with spinoffs like to game like Super Mario Bros, Mortal Kombat, Star Wars: X-Wing, and even Sonic, usually do well. The Wing Commander spin off games DIDN'T. Add to that the second Privateer game, which was a huge flop.

As popular as Wing Commander was, I don't think it reached the level that other game franchises reached. Another problem was I never once remembered seeing it available to rent for like Playstation, even though it was released for it. Again that probably happened only to me. But come, on, Video Game consoles were ahead of computer game consoles in the 90s, laregly becuase of where we were with RENTALS. Where I lived, it becasme illegal to rent computer games in the mid 90s, thus if you wanted to see what a game was like...best to rent a console games. I went to a few places like blockbuster and others and couldn't find it for PS1.

Maybe I'm not the right judge (dread, STILL another, another movie for you Tooner623), but that's just what I see.