RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,675
Posts: 5,212,731
Members: 24,202
Currently online: 669
Newest member: wendelcarree


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Site Forums > TrekToday News Items

TrekToday News Items Discussion of TrekToday news items

 
 
Thread Tools
Old March 3 2008, 07:11 PM   #16
Admiral Bear
Captain
 
Admiral Bear's Avatar
 
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

TJinPgh wrote: View Post
TrekToday wrote: View Post
"...I think that they are starting to look at it as a big summer crowd-pleaser as opposed to a very sci-fi, not-as-accessible-to a-wider-audience Christmas release. So the reason that they have moved the release date is for their ability to market the film and sort of position it as the Pirates of the Caribbean for next summer."
Read: We've spent a bundle on this movie and can't make it up in the 2-4 weeks a Christmas release affords. So, we're moving it to the summer so, IF it lasts long enough, it might show a profit.
I think that's probably the general consensus despite what other posters have written on this thread. It really reeks even more of the suits saying we are very pleased, and nothing will screw the film more than that.

The film may well turn out to be superb, but the fans who generally have a fairly good handle on these things, know what tends to happen when Paramount think it's making good product.
Admiral Bear is offline  
Old March 3 2008, 09:42 PM   #17
TJinPgh
Captain
 
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

Well, like I said before, I don't believe it has anything to do with a show of faith. It's a matter of demographics and necessity.
If they thought that this was true blockbuster material, it wouldn't matter if it was released at Christmas or not. They'd make enough in 2-4 weeks to cover at least 75% of the budget.
The demographics of this, whether they want to openly say it or not, is that the prime audience of a movie such as this is the <30 crowd (mostly male). Summer is simply the time when that demographic is the most accessible because you have summer break from college and school, in addition to it being the biggest vacation time of the year.
That's also where the necessity part comes in. The summer movie season is the longest BIG season of the year. Meaning, a movie can do well at any point during the summer and make a lot of money, versus the Christmas season which, while a movie may last for several months in a theatre, will make most of it's money up front, then taper off quickly.
The reality of the situation is that, no matter how much we, as Trek fans, may love the franchise, Star Trek films have never been "blockbusters." Yes, they tend to make a profit (only one hasn't). But, that is usually because the budgets are rather modest.
I'm sorry if I also don't buy into the J.J. Abrams hype. He has no track record in big screen production that lends itself to believing he knows what it takes to make $150m+ with a movie. He's not done it yet, anyway. His best effort, thus far, was MI:3, which failed to meet the budget. Cloverfield made a little over half of that, but only cost $30m to make. Which, truth be told, is exactly the thinking that should have gone into this movie.
TJinPgh is offline  
Old March 3 2008, 10:04 PM   #18
CaptainJon
Captain
 
CaptainJon's Avatar
 
Location: Second Star to the Right
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

A lot of the problem with M:i:III wasn't Abrams' fault. Cruise's popularity at the time wasn't great, and considering it was a Tom Cruise vehicle, that hurt the film from a PR perspective. But if you look at the reviews, it was a superior movie to its predecessors, and did a much better job of focusing on the ensemble than just the big headline star.

That M:i:III had more of an ensemble feel to it then its predecessors is encouraging for me, because it means that Abrams will find some way of being able to shuffle the entire cast to have some kind of screen time. While TOS' main focus was on "The Big Three", you've also got a villain and a Spock from the future, in addition to having to fit Captain Pike in. I think Abrams can do it and I'm looking forward to seeing what he gives us.

I think this change is a good one, and at least people are already talking about the movie in the media. Already I think it's been mentioned more since it was first announced then the last two Trek films ever were! How many magazines or news articles have listed this new movie as one of the top "must-see" or "most anticipated" movies of the year? I hope this schedule change will help increase its box office take.
CaptainJon is offline  
Old March 3 2008, 11:00 PM   #19
AntonyF
Administrator
 
AntonyF's Avatar
 
View AntonyF's Twitter Profile
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

I love your signature Zion!!
AntonyF is offline  
Old March 4 2008, 04:06 AM   #20
Captain Fine
Fleet Captain
 
Captain Fine's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto, ON
View Captain Fine's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to Captain Fine Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Captain Fine Send a message via Yahoo to Captain Fine
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

If putting this movie in the summer of '09 rather than Christmas '08 ensures that we get another movie after it, then I'm all for it. So I'm cautiously optimistic.
Captain Fine is offline  
Old March 4 2008, 06:06 AM   #21
TJinPgh
Captain
 
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

CaptainJon wrote: View Post
A lot of the problem with M:i:III wasn't Abrams' fault. Cruise's popularity at the time wasn't great, and considering it was a Tom Cruise vehicle, that hurt the film from a PR perspective.
I'm not suggesting it's lack of success was Abrams' fault. Nor am I suggesting that if, as I suspect, this movie doesn't do well, that it will necessarily be Abrams' fault either (other than the fact that I think he's put too much money into it).

I'm saying that his inovolvement in no way guarantees a success.

Abrams isn't a James Cameron or a Tim Burton. His involvement in a film doesn't prompt people to line up they way they do for some of the major producers out there.
TJinPgh is offline  
Old March 4 2008, 06:08 AM   #22
TJinPgh
Captain
 
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

RegentWorf wrote: View Post
If putting this movie in the summer of '09 rather than Christmas '08 ensures that we get another movie after it, then I'm all for it. So I'm cautiously optimistic.
It doesn't insure anything. It's an opportunity where one may not otherwise exist. Nothing more, nothing less.
TJinPgh is offline  
Old March 4 2008, 06:36 AM   #23
CaptainJon
Captain
 
CaptainJon's Avatar
 
Location: Second Star to the Right
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

TJinPgh wrote: View Post
Abrams isn't a James Cameron or a Tim Burton. His involvement in a film doesn't prompt people to line up they way they do for some of the major producers out there.
That's very true. If it were Cameron or Burton, you'd have lots of moviegoers flocking to see the movie. But let's keep in mind too that Abrams has his own following of television fans. He's got fans from Alias and Lost and I'm sure (dare I say?) even Felicity. So Abrams may have enough of a following if the movie is advertised right to pull in those people who really enjoy Abrams' works in these shows that they like.
CaptainJon is offline  
Old March 4 2008, 05:40 PM   #24
TJinPgh
Captain
 
Re: Lindelof On 'Star Trek XI' Date Change And Its Effects

Perhaps. And, I don't look to downplay his success with those shows (even if the current season of Lost stinks).

But, your thinking in that does sort of imply that tv watchers and movie goers are two mutually exclusive people. I'm not sure they are. And, if they are, will his involvement alone be enough to prompt TV watchers to go plop down their $10 each for a franchise that they chose to ignore on TV for free?

Cloverfield had a huge opening weekend (for that type of movie) and then tapered off quickly.

I really have to wonder how much of that initial gross was from EXISTING Trek fans who went to see the teaser, since not many went afterward, even though it, by and large, got very good critic reviews for the type of movie it was.

With respect to Cloverfield, it doesn't really matter since it made enough it's opening weekend to pay for it. Though, that's the advantage of a film that has about 1/5 the budget of your new one.
TJinPgh is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.