Star Trek Beyond - Part 3

[marvelrobbins]

with decling intrested in kelvin timeline and all the probelms with discovery i think trek is headed to outright reboot very soon.

 

[redhawk23]

Most of the problems discovery had were long before production. Seems to be going smoothly now.

 

[Kathemy]

A bit late on my part, but here's a sign of what seems to be the fallout of the Beyond experience.
Zachary Quinto: "No guarantees" for another Trek film

 

[Drizzle]

There's a lot factoring into why there's a hesitation of moving forward with another Trek film. Not just Beyond underperforming, but also the passing of Anton Yelchin. Chekov is probably the least essential out of the main crew, it still leaves a void if he's not there.

 

[Kathemy]

There's a lot factoring into why there's a hesitation of moving forward with another Trek film. Not just Beyond underperforming, but also the passing of Anton Yelchin. Chekov is probably the least essential out of the main crew, it still leaves a void if he's not there.

Star Trek IV isn't happening because Yelchin died? There's "no guarantee" for Star Trek IV because Yelchin died?

Ehm, okay.

 

[Drizzle]

Star Trek IV isn't happening because Yelchin died? There's "no guarantee" for Star Trek IV because Yelchin died?

Ehm, okay.

I never said that it was the only reason, I said it was one of the reasons.

 

[Fallen Angel]

It's happening.

 

[Kathemy]

I never said that it was the only reason, I said it was one of the reasons.

... but there is no evidence whatsoever it's one of the reasons, nor does it even make sense it would be one of the reasons. Why would it possibly be a reason to delay the fourth movie? Why would it possibly mean there's "no guarantee" for a fourth Star Trek movie?

 

[Drizzle]

... but there is no evidence whatsoever it's one of the reasons, nor does it even make sense it would be one of the reasons. Why would it possibly be a reason to delay the fourth movie? Why would it possibly mean there's "no guarantee" for a fourth Star Trek movie?

Again, I'm not saying it won't happen because of it. You're putting words in my mouth. I said there's probably hesitation BESIDES THE FACT THAT BEYOND UNDERPERFORMED. But also, it's never an easy task for production to start on a film when one of the principal actors in the franchise has died.

 

[Kathemy]

Again, I'm not saying it won't happen because of it. You're putting words in my mouth. I said there's probably hesitation BESIDES THE FACT THAT BEYOND UNDERPERFORMED. But also, it's never an easy task for production to start on a film when one of the principal actors in the franchise has died.

But, one of the principal actors haven't died. This isn't meant to put down the late Yelchin, but he wasn't a principal actor. He had no noteworthy relationships with any of the crewmembers for three movies. He had no major character moments.

If Beyond had showed Paramount that Star Trek was profitable, Trek IV would already be filming regardless of Yelchin's untimely death. It tanked, so Trek IV isn't, and it wouldn't be right now even if he were alive. You know this, I know this, and that's all that is material.

The chance of a new Trek film is 100%, but the failure of the latest movie, like Nemesis, may have killed off this movie timeline.

 

[Bruce Malone]

I never said that it was the only reason, I said it was one of the reasons.

Way down on the totem pole to the question if another Trek movie will actually be profitable?

After Trek 09 Paramount could have had their own GoTG type franchise if timing and marketing were much better or to Disney standards at least.

 

[Dark Raven]

They don't really need Anton Yelchin to move forward with Trek though. In the TV series, Chekov wasn't even in the first season, and he wasn't in all the episodes either. They can just treat it like that and don't even need to explain. It's not like he's the only navigator on the ship. They need a few more different crew men to accompany Kirk on missions, just like in the series.

And every odd film in the series of original Trek films under performed, yet they still went back for another film. Why couldn't they do the same here?

 

[2kt09]

And every odd film in the series of original Trek films under performed, yet they still went back for another film. Why couldn't they do the same here?

I'm assuming relative cost of making and marketing these flicks.

 

[MadVillainy]

The only way they do a sequel is if they reduce the budget a large amount
But then everyone is going to have to take a paycut. Do they love their roles that much to take a paycut?
And then they have to write a smaller story

I just dont see a direct sequel happening. Honestly why would they? I know people like to complain about studios but Hollywood is a business. Forget the hippie stuff, these people are in the business of making money.
Beyond did WAY less than the other 2 films domestically. (09 did $257,730,019, STID did $228,778,661, STB did $158,848,340) and then overseas it did less than STID.
From a business perspective, why would you continue to put money in a sinking ship? Especially in Paramounts case where other than Transformers and Mission Impossible their franchises are lacking financially

I get that people want to see sequels to things, but let's be real. From what I've read blockbusters usually spend the same amount of money marketing as they do making it. Going off that STB reportedly cost $185 mill let's say with marketing that's $370,000,000. THe movie grossed $336 mill and then studios see much less of the international revenue then domestic.

 

[Kathemy]

And every odd film in the series of original Trek films under performed, yet they still went back for another film. Why couldn't they do the same here?

But... this is just not true. The only Trek movie before Beyond that undoubtedly lost money was Nemesis, which killed the TNG franchise and ushered a seven year movie hiatus. Even The Final Frontier, a terrible movie, made money. The Motion Picture, The Search For Spock and Generations were all hits. (And Nemesis was an "even number" )

We're now in approximately the same spot as after Nemesis. This is somewhat aggravated by Paramount's sad state, and inflation of movie budgets in recent years meaning one miss can be very costly. If you want I can provide some charts to illustrate it.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yelchin has nothing to do with the decision.

Remember they "announced" the fourth movie and the plot right before the third one came out.

 

[marvelrobbins]

But... this is just not true. The only Trek movie before Beyond that undoubtedly lost money was Nemesis, which killed the TNG franchise and ushered a seven year movie hiatus. Even The Final Frontier, a terrible movie, made money. The Motion Picture, The Search For Spock and Generations were all hits. (And Nemesis was an "even number" )

We're now in approximately the same spot as after Nemesis. This is somewhat aggravated by Paramount's sad state, and inflation of movie budgets in recent years meaning one miss can be very costly. If you want I can provide some charts to illustrate it.

nemesis is only trek film that bombed.now beyond was clear underperformer.especilly with high production costs.many longtime trekkers just don't care much about new films.and quite honestly the ga is losing intrest with real star wars films.look beyond was much more like true star trek than first 2 films were.into darkness hurt franchise much more than
people want to admit.beyond suffered for it.

 

[STARMAN]

The foreign market doesn't help this franchise or bail it out the way it does for other movies. Their is a lack of growth potential. Cost may be adjusted accordingly.

 

[Mysteryman]

The foreign market doesn't help this franchise or bail it out the way it does for other movies. Their is a lack of growth potential. Cost may be adjusted accordingly.

Yeah, I expect a REALLY Low budget sequel.
If it does well, it could restart the franchise.
if it doesn't, one more adventure could close it out nicely.
I watch Star Trek Beyond all of the time on Epix.
I LOVED That film.

 

[2kt09]

Yeah, I expect a REALLY Low budget sequel.
If it does well, it could restart the franchise.
if it doesn't, one more adventure could close it out nicely.
I watch Star Trek Beyond all of the time on Epix.
I LOVED That film.

Straight up. Justin Lin wasn't fooling around with what he said about Star Trek.

 

[Kathemy]

nemesis is only trek film that bombed.now beyond was clear underperformer.especilly with high production costs.

Again, I could demonstrate why, although Nemesis definitely bombed, Star Trek Beyond probably lost more money at the box office. But the point being these are the only two clearly unprofitable Trek movies. Studios don't want to clear a sequel after the last try hurt their bottom line. not without major shakeups.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Way down on the totem pole to the question if another Trek movie will actually be profitable?

After Trek 09 Paramount could have had their own GoTG type franchise if timing and marketing were much better or to Disney standards at least.

Star Trek is too far behind in modern marketing techniques to be that successful. Disney had a cartoon ready to go before by the the movie had been in theaters.


Discovery is getting the toy push from CBS.

 

[TheVileOne]

Apparently one issue is that CBS only wanted to market classic series stuff to fans, and apparently they were never getting fully on board with JJ Abrams and Co.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Apparently one issue is that CBS only wanted to market classic series stuff to fans, and apparently they were never getting fully on board with JJ Abrams and Co.

I think it was paramount that didn't want to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Start Trek the tv series.

There could have been a massive Bond50 Skyfall effect but aside from releasing Beyond on the 50th anniversary year not much was hyped.

 

[-JKR-]

A bit late on my part, but here's a sign of what seems to be the fallout of the Beyond experience.
Zachary Quinto: "No guarantees" for another Trek film

I really love the new Star Trek movies, but unfortunately I don't see a fourth one happening with the recent change of regime at Paramount. But hey, at least we got a kick-ass trilogy.