J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by M.A.C.O., Dec 3, 2013.

  1. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Perhaps because they already felt that tons of people would see the film anyway based on the success of the previous one, that they decided to keep Khan a secret to actually, you know, have some fun with it ;)

    That's a good question. I suppose it would be the same situation as above: Would they feel that because it's a new SW movie, that that would be enough to get millions of asses in theater seats, or would they need a carrot on a stick to lure them there?
     
  2. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia, Kelvin timeline
    This bit (perhaps reworded to read "For those who'd like to see Abrams' statement in context... ") would have been a good fit in your previous post, in place of the "(obvious, if you don't have an anti-Abrams agenda, I suppose, or if you just learned how to use context clues in elementary school)" part, which wasn't at all essential to the point.
     
  3. Crisp Crinkle

    Crisp Crinkle Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    Gene's office
    After looking over the box office returns again, I can't really see any reasonable way to regard decisions on how STID was marketed as mistakes, if by a "mistake" one means something that hurt the bottom line. If STID had been a failure or only a marginal success, then second-guessing or Monday morning quarterbacking the marketing campaign might be in order. But given that STID was a success, how one could validly argue that the returns would have been better, if only someone in marketing had done thus and so, is really a mystery to me.

    This is by far a more respectable position than getting bent out of shape about how the film was marketed.
     
  4. MakeshiftPython

    MakeshiftPython Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Location:
    Ladies love Riker's beard.
    Likely because as good as STID did, it didn't do as well as many expected it to as a follow up. It did less domestically than the 2009 film, despite having a boost in 3D and IMAX tickets. The fact that Abrams himself regards the marketing strategy in hiding Khan as mistake should tell you something. STID was not a failure, but it's box office run isn't as impressive as other successful franchises and might not be enough for Paramount to want to put out so much money. That's also why there's talks of budgets being lower for the follow up film, because they realize it's not going to make the kind of profit that other franchises like PIRATES, TRANSFORMERS, THE DARK KNIGHT, MARVEL, ect makes.

    Would revealing Khan from the get go have changed things? Perhaps, but we'll never really know. Still, it's clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity.
     
  5. Crisp Crinkle

    Crisp Crinkle Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    Gene's office
    Nah.

    "Clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity" by a vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans, perhaps. In a more general way, I don't think so.

    I can find no suggestion that Paramount considers it a "lost opportunity." As a matter of fact, in the interview JJ calls it their idea! :lol:

    Word got out in plenty of time that it was Khan, for that to influence who was going to see it, anyway. The only reason JJ's apologizing is for lying to the hardcore base in the buildup (by denying it was Khan). He pretty much says that. Don't tell me that some of the hardcore fans are mad at themselves for believing him on that account? :lol: I didn't! I wasn't as sure it was going to be Khan as a few of the other people on the board were, but boy was it clear that some were really sure it would be Khan all along!

    As for the budget for STXIII, there's a whole thread for that. Word is that it's "being lowered" because they can get the same bang outside of the Hollywood area for a smaller buck than they could inside it. That sounds a great way not to waste money. I really doubt that decision will affect the quality of the movie one way or another.
     
  6. MakeshiftPython

    MakeshiftPython Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Location:
    Ladies love Riker's beard.
    Abrams seems to think so, hence referring to the way it was handled as a "mistake". That's from the horse's mouth, not just some vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans. I agree with him. Had they been clear it was Khan from the get go, there would have been more hype and publicity over the fact that Benedict Cumberbatch was going to play an iconic villain such as Khan, certainly more than "Cumberbatch will play some guy named John Harrison who terrorizes Starfleet and such". Best case scenario, many folks unfamiliar with Khan would actually be interested in checking out the two stories with Khan, and even better, like them enough to really look forward to the next Trek. Isn't that what all fans want, for everyone to enjoy this franchise we all love?
     
  7. Crisp Crinkle

    Crisp Crinkle Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    Gene's office
    That's not what Abrams said, though.
     
  8. MakeshiftPython

    MakeshiftPython Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Location:
    Ladies love Riker's beard.
    Sure, I can bet you anything that it is on his mind. He's a Hollywood producer, he knows Trek is a cash cow, that there's potential profit, and would be a fool to think otherwise. Paramount certainly is.
     
  9. Crisp Crinkle

    Crisp Crinkle Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    Gene's office
    So, which is it, from the horse's mouth, or that you can bet me anything that it is on his mind?

    All I can see, reading between the lines, is that JJ regrets his alienation with a certain part of the hardcore fanbase. Maybe you can point me to where he talks about a "lost opportunity" or says that not revealing Khan earlier cost them domestic market share.
     
  10. MakeshiftPython

    MakeshiftPython Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Location:
    Ladies love Riker's beard.
    Both. Why would he be so concerned enough to regard it as a mistake because of alienating a certain part of the hardcore fanbase? You'd only regard it as such if it had to do with the big picture. Either way, I'll give him points for acknowledging the choice as a mistake, whether it was his call or Paramount's, they're all guilty of it.
     
  11. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    There was that unexpected delay with the script, wasn't it? I guess that's where the Khan thing happened.
     
  12. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    Into Darkness made more money than any other Trek movie, I thought it was great and we are getting a sequel. How could it have possibly gone better if audiences knew Harrison was Khan?
     
  13. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    I think people are missing something: there could simply be a "high end" that Trek movies can be realistically expected to make. That Star Trek will never have the same market appeal as super-hero and fantasy movies.
     
  14. MakeshiftPython

    MakeshiftPython Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Location:
    Ladies love Riker's beard.
    I agree with that, which is why Paramount can't keep spending such a budget that is usually reserved for those kind of films. Would revealing Khan have shot up the movie to gross a billion dollars? Likely not, but I can't imagine it would have made less than it ended up making. That's my speculation, but one I stand by. Paramount shouldn't be intimidated by Trek being too "niche" with stuff like Khan of all things. It implies they're not too confident about their brand, which can't be true given the generous budgets that the older films never dreamed of getting.
     
  15. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    Thing is, the reason they chose Khan is because it's "what everyone wanted." You'd think if you're going to include "what everyone wanted" in the movie, you'd want to promote the hell out of it, not keep it a secret. Hell, at the very least they could have made John Harrison the renegade Starfleet officer public a lot sooner than they did.

    I guarantee you, hearing "the Enterprise crew fights Khan" or "the Enterprise crew fights a renegade Starfleet officer" makes the movie sound a lot more exciting than "the Enterprise crew fights someone."
     
  16. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Remember how so many people were saying that it had to be Khan because of the marketing potential? I guess they were wrong.
     
  17. Sindatur

    Sindatur The Grey Owl Wizard Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    Eh, I had lots of "average movie going Fans' come up to me, knowing I am a SciFi Geek asking me if it was Khan. So, I think the Rumor mill got it out there, and built up the "Is it or isn't it, watch the film to find out" hype. I don't really believe a straight out "It's Khan" Marketing campaign would've worked any better for the General audience, and I don't believe a sizable chunk of the hardcore fans stayed away from or went to see the film based upon wether they thought Khan was in it or not.
     
  18. doubleohfive

    doubleohfive Fleet Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    The nerd rage and foaming at the mouth about this movie got to be ridiculous, and I knew, I just KNEW the minute I saw that article pop up on Pajiba that someone would post it here and (whether intentionally or not) misconstrue JJ's quote. I was not advocating that it was a better or ideal way to promote the film. I was attempting to point out the oversight by the OP's insinuation that this was all done to "snub" longtime Trek fans. That's all.
     
  19. Cinema Geekly

    Cinema Geekly Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    I'd tend to agree with your first sentence except your your bottom paragraph basically proves them right.

    Anyone who seriously thought that John Harrison was just going to be John Harrison was an idiot. From the first time I hear of the the serious inclusion of the Botonay Bay post credits scene that they were going with Khan in the second movie.

    Not only did it only make the most sense in the world, all of their rumored casting choices gave it away, even when they went with a less obvious choice, everything was pointing to Khan. If nobody figured it out by the time the first teaser came well before the actual film, and they still thought it wasn't going to be Khan then they deserved to be let down.

    Seriously, it was a very poorly kept secret. Most people just seemed to be in some kind of denial about it.
     
  20. Hazel

    Hazel Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    Bearing in mind I haven't seen STID so I don't know how well the reveal was handled, I thought the 'teasing' got a bit tedious, at least for fans.

    PR dept: "There a super-sekrit villain surprise in STID!"
    Fans: "It's Khan, isn't it?"
    PR dept:"It's an awesome surprise!"
    Fans: "Yeah, it's Khan."
    PR dept: "Nooo, Cumberbatch is playing John Harrison, tee-hee!"
    Fans:"Guys, we know it's Khan."
    Karl Urban: It's Gary Mitchell! Oops, I totally leaked the secret!"
    Fans: *sigh*

    6 months later:

    Cumberbatch: "My name is Khan!"
    Fans: "No shit, Sherlock."