Two brilliant things: films and slashing Star Trek
Firstly, we come to the New York Times - which has done an amazing infographic of US domestic film revenues, adjusted for inflation, since January 1986.
The remarkable thing is how difficult it is to interpret, yet I’m sure there’s some very deep information - any sensible Hollywood mogul is going to print it out and pin it to the wall so s/he can say “But look! Titanic came out at the same time of year and it did a billion!”
Actually, the interesting thing would be the names of the films that did between $250m and $862m (which for some strange reason is the top line). And how long they lasted at the box office. (The English Patient, for example, has an amazingly long tail.) As to whether there’s any pattern in big-hit movies now, well, who knows.
And now.. I’d heard that there’s a subgenre of Star Trek fanfiction called “slash” - as in “Kirk/Spock”. Weird enough. But now you can cut those early episodes together to make your own presentation…
- These posts might be related (the database thinks..):
- No, I'll beam *you* up, Scotty (20 July 2005; score: 56.55%)
- "We should be on Mars by now" - but it's a good thing we aren't (5 October 2004; score: 40.54%)
- OK, I *really* don't get Lord of The Rings (8 July 2005; score: 35.85%)
![[Valid RSS]](wp-includes/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
February 25th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
> there’s a subgenre of Star Trek fanfiction called “slash”
“Slash” has become a generic term for any dodgy fan-fiction along these lines, no just Star Trek. I’m told (he said, pointedly) that Doctor Who and Buffy The Vampire Slayer are other favourite targets (though, presumably, not together).
NME even did a feature on band-related slash fiction a couple of years back. The Libertines were apparently quite well represented.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
@paul - there’s also slash fiction on Harry Potter, involving him and his second-worst enemy. Which to me only goes to show how slash fiction really doesn’t understand how peoples’ (ie novelists’, or screenwriters’) minds work; the genre isn’t not about character, just *available* characters.