Star Trek Beyond - Part 3

[MadVillainy]

Am I the only one who didn't care about Jaylah?
She didnt do anything memorable for me and her one fight scene was kinda lame

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Just because they arent in high demand like a Pratt or Fassbender doesn't mean they are willing to get paid less than they're worth. Theyve done 3 films and have earned the inevitable pay bump.
None of them need Star Trek.

And to the bolded I don't get when people say stuff like this. People tried to say the same thing about the new Ghostbusters. No studio is going to make a direct sequel to a movie franchise that isn't making them money. It doesn't matter how desperate they are.

Star Trek is a franchise that has made hem money though, and recently. Beyond was marketed extremely poorly and that didn't help when it came to the BO take. But it still made almost $350 million WW. Why they didn't market it more and make more of a big deal about the 50 anniversary I will never know. And I am not even a huge Trek fan and even I know this.

I bet they're using the term "soft reboot" in Paramount's offices.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Am I the only one who didn't care about Jaylah?
She didnt do anything memorable for me and her one fight scene was kinda lame

I really liked her myself. The fight scene wasn't much of a spectacle, but there was meaning and emotion behind it at least.

 

[Lord]

While i agree that Beyond wasn't as well directed as the previous films, i would say it's box office failure had more to do with the marketing. Some of the posters were great and aside from the first, the trailers were alright. But i barely saw anything of that being advertised, there simply wasn't much exposure.

The ideal for a 4th would be for J. J. to come back (i don't see many ways Paramount will risk another bomb if he doesn't) and Simon Pegg to write the script again. The big problem in Abrams's film realy was the script, and the duo behind those problems is no longer in the franchise.

 

[MadVillainy]

]Star Trek is a franchise that has made hem money though, and recently.[/B] Beyond was marketed extremely poorly and that didn't help when it came to the BO take. But it still made almost $350 million WW. Why they didn't market it more and make more of a big deal about the 50 anniversary I will never know. And I am not even a huge Trek fan and even I know this.



Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Sure ST made money recently.
You know what it did even more recently? It underperformed.

Hollywood is very much a "what have you done for me lately" place. They're not going to make a direct sequel, that probably will have to cost more money unless they radically scale back the story (which I don't think will appeal to the masses) or the actors would have to take a paycut (which I don't see happening)

Blame the marketing, blame whatever. The fact is that it underperformed.

SB had the lowest domestic returns of any of the 3 movies and overall it did the worst.
$340 mill is good on paper, but they spent over 180 mill just to make it and probably another 75-100 mill marketing it.

"Just scale it back" is so much easier said than done when you have to factor that actors and any returning crew member will be expecting a pay bump. No one likes staying at a company/job and taking a pay cut

Unless the home video sales are phenomenal then I think Pine, Quinto and them are done

EDIT: It's actually really strange the dive this has taken domestically. ST= $257 mill, STID= $228 mill, STB= $158 mill.
I assume or am guessing that STID still made so much overseas because of Cumberbatch. Otherwise I don't know why

 

[DyeLorean]

One positive thing I will say about the film is that I liked the way they put different set of characters together from what we've seen of them in previous films.

One of the most interesting aspects of team dynamics is watching different characters interacting with each other. Part of what makes the MCU so damn good is exactly this kind of things. So, it was a good thing to see Bones with Spock or Chekov with Kirk.

 

[titansupes]

Am I the only one who didn't care about Jaylah?
She didnt do anything memorable for me and her one fight scene was kinda lame

I didn't care about her either.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

EDIT: It's actually really strange the dive this has taken domestically. ST= $257 mill, STID= $228 mill, STB= $158 mill.
I assume or am guessing that STID still made so much overseas because of Cumberbatch. Otherwise I don't know why

All the hype was behind STID as the follow up to 09.

Without some gimmick to bolster SB, it was going to drop.

 

[Dark Raven]

One positive thing I will say about the film is that I liked the way they put different set of characters together from what we've seen of them in previous films.

One of the most interesting aspects of team dynamics is watching different characters interacting with each other. Part of what makes the MCU so damn good is exactly this kind of things. So, it was a good thing to see Bones with Spock or Chekov with Kirk.

Kevin Feige should consider having Marvel make films for other people or franchises. They obviously wouldn't be MCU or superhero films, but they'd employ some of the same techniques. They could try their hand at a Star Trek film.

Marvel did once have the comic rights to Star Trek before DC had them. Not sure who does now.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

DC published Trek comics before Marvel for longer than Marvel did actually before Trek went to Marvel.

Also... Yeah not so sure about that idea, of MS making EVERYTHING.

 

[ehh]

The thing with Star Trek is that there is no rush to get another film out. It's not like if they don't make another film, the rights will revert back to another company. I would really love it though if Disney came out and bought Star Trek.

 

[Ipodman]

They can't even use the 50th anniversary to stir interest.

I propose to include TNG characters like Picard or Data in the next movie.

 

[Heretic]

Just saw this movie.

I've never been much of a Trek fan...but it still kind of ticks me off that they erased everything that has ever happened in the history of the franchise in order to give people character names that they recognize. I am OVER Spock...and this Kirk doesn't really seem like the same guy as the Kirk I'd seen previously. My preference would have been to maybe have a movie where Picard's team docks into Deep Space 9 and have something cataclysmic there that creates a new team to continue on, and maybe reset the status quo...destroy Starfleet or something so that team is more on their own. But, anyway...

Oh yeah....I thought the first reboot film was fun, and really did not like Into Darkness at all.

Anyway, Beyond was fun. I appreciate them adding a new team member (again, because I wish the entire team was new). The third act lost me though. Basing a major plot point around playing an old song just screamed "WE WANT TO BE GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY" so bad. Isn't this two out of three films where the bad guy was a former Starfleet employee though?

Fun...but not something I'm going to remember much about by the time the next one comes out.

 

[Octoberist]

Just saw this movie.

I've never been much of a Trek fan...but it still kind of ticks me off that they erased everything that has ever happened in the history of the franchise in order to give people character names that they recognize. I am OVER Spock...and this Kirk doesn't really seem like the same guy as the Kirk I'd seen previously. My preference would have been to maybe have a movie where Picard's team docks into Deep Space 9 and have something cataclysmic there that creates a new team to continue on, and maybe reset the status quo...destroy Starfleet or something so that team is more on their own. But, anyway...

Oh yeah....I thought the first reboot film was fun, and really did not like Into Darkness at all.

Anyway, Beyond was fun. I appreciate them adding a new team member (again, because I wish the entire team was new). The third act lost me though. Basing a major plot point around playing an old song just screamed "WE WANT TO BE GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY" so bad. Isn't this two out of three films where the bad guy was a former Starfleet employee though?

Fun...but not something I'm going to remember much about by the time the next one comes out.

Sorry what? This is an alternate timeline - it didn't erase anything. So of course this Kirk isn't like Shatner's Kirk, etc.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Sure ST made money recently.
You know what it did even more recently? It underperformed.

Hollywood is very much a "what have you done for me lately" place. They're not going to make a direct sequel, that probably will have to cost more money unless they radically scale back the story (which I don't think will appeal to the masses) or the actors would have to take a paycut (which I don't see happening)

Blame the marketing, blame whatever. The fact is that it underperformed.

SB had the lowest domestic returns of any of the 3 movies and overall it did the worst.
$340 mill is good on paper, but they spent over 180 mill just to make it and probably another 75-100 mill marketing it.

"Just scale it back" is so much easier said than done when you have to factor that actors and any returning crew member will be expecting a pay bump. No one likes staying at a company/job and taking a pay cut

Unless the home video sales are phenomenal then I think Pine, Quinto and them are done

EDIT: It's actually really strange the dive this has taken domestically. ST= $257 mill, STID= $228 mill, STB= $158 mill.
I assume or am guessing that STID still made so much overseas because of Cumberbatch. Otherwise I don't know why

The marketing was really poor though. We didnt get the first trailer until a few months before release, which is extremely rare these days. Normally first trailers are out a year or more before release to build hype, even with sequels. I know you are saying it did poorly and I am not denying that in any way. But if this was advertised better and just plainly more it might have made a bit more WW.

The thing I really didn't get was they rushed the movie into production in order to come out in 2016 for the 50th anniversary and then didn't even do anything to tie Beyond to it. The reason we didn't get a trailer until late was because of the rushed and late start to production. I just don't get it.

I do think Abrams may be an influence in getting a possible sequel made though. Even more so if he comes back to direct.

 

[MadVillainy]

The marketing was really poor though. We didnt get the first trailer until a few months before release, which is extremely rare these days. Normally first trailers are out a year or more before release to build hype, even with sequels. I know you are saying it did poorly and I am not denying that in any way. But if this was advertised better and just plainly more it might have made a bit more WW.

The thing I really didn't get was they rushed the movie into production in order to come out in 2016 for the 50th anniversary and then didn't even do anything to tie Beyond to it. The reason we didn't get a trailer until late was because of the rushed and late start to production. I just don't get it.

I do think Abrams may be an influence in getting a possible sequel made though. Even more so if he comes back to direct.

Couldve, shouldve, wouldve.
All those facts don't change the fact it didn't do well. That's all they care about. I'm not debating how it was advertised or if it was rushed into production. That has nothing to do with what I'm saying
I'm saying it didn't make a lot of dough, so they probably aren't making a direct sequel

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Couldve, shouldve, wouldve.
All those facts don't change the fact it didn't do well. That's all they care about. I'm not debating how it was advertised or if it was rushed into production. That has nothing to do with what I'm saying
I'm saying it didn't make a lot of dough, so they probably aren't making a direct sequel

I think we may be arguing different things here, as I agree with the points you are making, and accept it didn't make good money, except one.

I personally still think the there is a chance we will get a sequel. Not a guarantee, but a chance.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I propose to include TNG characters like Picard or Data in the next movie.

Nah. Don't make the Star Wars mistake of making everything smaller by connections.

At this point they still haven't played the good guy is a bad guy in this alternate universe button yet.

Everyone's in the exact same positions with different faces.

 

[ehh]

I think we may be arguing different things here, as I agree with the points you are making, and accept it didn't make good money, except one.

I personally still think the there is a chance we will get a sequel. Not a guarantee, but a chance.

The thing is that Star Trek Beyond did not do well enough to guarantee a sequel, but it's not bad enough to make it impossible. And although the production budget is over $180 Million, I don't think the marketing budget was that high considering the lack of promotion.

I really don't know what is gong to happen to this franchise, but I don't think it is dead and done.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The thing is that Star Trek Beyond did not do well enough to guarantee a sequel, but it's not bad enough to make it impossible. And although the production budget is over $180 Million, I don't think the marketing budget was that high considering the lack of promotion.

I really don't know what is gong to happen to this franchise, but I don't think it is dead and done.

My thoughts exactly, I think we will see something else from this universe at some point. I don't think it will be a big budget sequel though. But we will see.

 

[ehh]

My thoughts exactly, I think we will see something else from this universe at some point. I don't think it will be a big budget sequel though. But we will see.

Usually people take the production budget and multiple it by 2 to take the marketing budget into consideration. ST:B cost $185M to make, but we know they didn't spend $185M on marketing. We got a couple of trailers and a small amount of TV spots, some character posters, FB posts and clips, etc.

The marketing budget for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 cost a little under $190M, and it really shows. They had several theatrical trailers, multiple alternate and international trailers, a superbowl trailer, a trailer at Times square for New Year's Eve, multiple featurettes, 20+ TV spots, and much much more. Over 20 minutes of the actual film were released throughout marketing, and it made people sick of the movie before it came out.

I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing budget for ST:B was closer to around $100M if not less.

 

[Heretic]

Sorry what? This is an alternate timeline - it didn't erase anything. So of course this Kirk isn't like Shatner's Kirk, etc.

Ah yes...an alternate timeline. So, all of that stuff happened...it will just not in any way impact what will happen in the future...and events can happen again (like fighting Khan).

I'm aware that they dressed it up as something other than a reboot...probably because they wanted to give Leonard Nimoy a shout-out in three more freaking movies...but the results are the same...we are moving forward without the history of the franchise existing in the reality we are following.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Usually people take the production budget and multiple it by 2 to take the marketing budget into consideration. ST:B cost $185M to make, but we know they didn't spend $185M on marketing. We got a couple of trailers and a small amount of TV spots, some character posters, FB posts and clips, etc.

The marketing budget for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 cost a little under $190M, and it really shows. They had several theatrical trailers, multiple alternate and international trailers, a superbowl trailer, a trailer at Times square for New Year's Eve, multiple featurettes, 20+ TV spots, and much much more. Over 20 minutes of the actual film were released throughout marketing, and it made people sick of the movie before it came out.

I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing budget for ST:B was closer to around $100M if not less.

Definitely, TASM2 trailers were everywhere in 2014, it actually got a bit ridiculous. Beyond was pretty much the opposite, only saw trailers and spots sparingly, if ever.

 

[ehh]

I think that a production budget of $125-150M should be the maximum for a Star Trek film. They should use some more money on their marketing campaign instead.

 

[kguillou]

So I had my father watch this on blu ray and I usually feel he's a good measure for "GA audience" reception for movies. He loved the JJ Abrams films so I was curious to hear hia thoughts on this one. And his reaction was "I was disappointed, to be honest, it was ok but the first two were way better."

This was kind of my reaction to the film, too, it was entertaining but....it lacked something to make it pop for me like ST '09 and STID, I cant quite explain it but I'm assuming this sentiment may also be attributed to the GA and why this didn't do as well as the other two.