Didn't they say that the movie couldn't compete with Star Wars and al?
Why didn't Beyond do better at the Box Office?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
- Status
Didn't they say that the movie couldn't compete with Star Wars and al?
Much to the dismay of Bad Robot, CBS’ merchandising arm continued to create memorabilia and products based on the cast of the original 1960s series and market them to Trekkies… Bad Robot asked CBS to stop making products featuring the original cast, but talks broke down over money… In response, the company scaled back its ambitions to have “Star Trek’s” storylines play out with television shows, spin-off films and online components, something Abrams had been eager to accomplish.
http://www.thewrap.com/how-web-star-trek-rights-killed-jj-abrams-grand-ambitions-91766/
In the post you quoted?
No, he said nothing of the kind.
Yeah, it's always that one article - with remarks from an unnamed "individual with knowledge of the dispute," a gossip-column dash of "TheWrap has learned" such-and-so, neither Paramount nor Bad Robot willing to comment, and a really generic statement from "a spokesman for CBS Consumer Products".
Now, I don't doubt that Abrams had some ideas for merchandising which went much broader than just the movies—that would have made plenty of sense, from a business standpoint and from a creative one—but the article is paper-thin on substance and yet too often held up as "proof" of J.J.'s greed and ambitions for "100%Control".
I wouldn't have liked it, either. The Kelvin timeline is a piece of the Star Trek franchise. It's not a replacement for it.
There was a video game (eventually), but it was crap.
No but that was the general idea.
But it wasn't.
There's not one thing in donners' post which gives a sense that he was "speak[ing] as if [he] expected the movie to be a financial fiasco". You've assigned a meaning which is found nowhere in his words.
I'd recommend, in future responses, that you limit yourself to addressing what people have actually said, rather than speaking to invented messages which are in no way supported by the actual text of their posts. I think you'll find it makes for a friendlier and more productive discussion.
What do you expect as evidence? A signed contract and a video with the participants signing it? Unless they're is a huge Sony-style email leak things like that emerge only as inside information rumors. Seeing how things turned out seven years down the line it makes it look legitimate though.
Yes, it seems that I have misunderstood him. I apologize.
This would've been good news, if there had been another hundred-million on the domestic side.
Considering everyone panicked at the $166 million and $244 million mark, it's Excellent.
There is nothing excellent about Beyond's box office take. It'll eventually see profitability, but it is a disappointment as far as the box office goes. There's no way to read the numbers any other way.
You're right, unfortunately.
Oh man, don't ever say that to Rama....
I hate to admit it. I thought Paramount had a hit on their hands.
Can't say I was ever in that camp. I only ended up seeing it because I got a free ticket from the TWOK blue ray. And then it was exactly what I expected from the trailers - a hodgepodge of Trek Clichés - executed superbly, for sure, Lin did a great job - but incredibly repetitive. It was like a greatest hits album of Trek films. Everything in it was good, but nothing was new.
IMO film Trek is in just as much of a rut as TV Trek was. The next film needs to truly go where no film has gone before, not give us more of the same.
They need to pull the Borg out of mothballs.
The borg in Kirk's time? That's audacious.
Kirk against an army of cybernetic zombies. What's not to love? Pull a page from The Walking Dead and drop the viewer into the story after a full blown invasion of the Federation.
- Status
Similar threads
