I'm absolutely hoping that this is just a bit of teething problems a lot of projects go through. It's not that unusual of a thing that's happening now is it??
Star Trek 4 Hits A Snag
- Thread starter Doc Mugatu
- Start date
I'm absolutely hoping that this is just a bit of teething problems a lot of projects go through. It's not that unusual of a thing that's happening now is it??
No, it's not.
I believe even the news accounts speculate it could be posturing. Paramount can also get creative in the deal making. Maybe give them production deals or greenlight any passion project they may have.
Part of the problem is Paramount has a justified sense of what the projected return on investment will be so that caps what cash they guarantee on the front end (and maybe what they are willing to give up on the back). Especially if other contracts have been set in that it could trigger renegotiations (especially with say Zoe Saldana in this new era of equal pay - she is female lead #1 and a box-office draw).
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. I am hopeful that a Chris Pine deal will get made. It'd be funny if they got Liam Hemsworth to replace Chris.
I would agree if these projects were airing on a broadcast (or even a cable) network but not a startup streaming service. Even a mediocre Star Trek 4 film could put shine on the CBS All Access offerings while the reverse is likely not to be true. Right now it is very much in CBS's best interest for a deal to get made and a new Trek feature film to go into production in order to start generating some publicity and buzz.
Having a TV series that a couple million people watch doesn't make something "relevant."
Trek is as important and meaningful in today's media landscape as "Blue Bloods."
Anyway, since we don't need any of this, let's have another of these fun movies and ditch the All Access slop instead.
I hope this can get resolved. I keep seeing comments about Trek doesn't need this cast because of Discovery or the new Stewart series, but the fact is those are still either in its infancy or not even here yet. I would be heart broken if we don't get a Kelvin cast film again. There was so much hope after Beyond, to see it end suddenly and the reaction being from the fan-base that they don't care, it makes me sad.
By the way, I was at the convention last week and when asked how many people watched Discovery, a lot of hands in the room went up. To say Trek is relevant today and we don't need these movies is a disservice at best.
By the way, I was at the convention last week and when asked how many people watched Discovery, a lot of hands in the room went up. To say Trek is relevant today and we don't need these movies is a disservice at best.
Problem is, you ask fifteen different people, you'll get fourteen different answers--as this board proves every day.
Problem is, you ask fifteen different people, you'll get fourteen different answers--as this board proves every day.
So the 15th person doesn't count, or is that where we draw the line on repeated answers?
I'm curious just how much Paramount is saving by picking a Lady Director (S.J. Clarkson) who has only done TV and cable network productions.
I can pretty much imagine that They are not paying her anywhere near top dollar.
So to me, it seems pretty chitty for Them to be balking on paying for BIG Name actors.
(especially when one of them already had a deal)
I can pretty much imagine that They are not paying her anywhere near top dollar.
So to me, it seems pretty chitty for Them to be balking on paying for BIG Name actors.
(especially when one of them already had a deal)
I won't hold my breath considering the state of Paramount as a company in general. It's like watching an animal with busted hind legs continue to limp around and follow routines that have hurt them since 2010 onward. I'd enjoy ST4 if it had a proper foundation to blossom from. Even all of the CBS Trek popping up is questionable. Between Les Moonves scandal potentially effecting the structure of CBS and Shari Redstone battling to keep Paramount afloat to eventually sell off (plus the whole CBS v. Paramount issue) I see all of this Trek news as up in the air until things normalize. At most DSC S2 will be a reality. Bar that everything else and sadly including a good ST4 are just dreams floating in and out of sight.
It's just how the business works. RDJ threatened to walk away from the MCU too a few times and Disney suddenly ponied up more money; to the point he did CA:CW and SM:H in addition to A:IW<--- the latter was the only one he was contractually obligated for.. It all depends on just how much Paramount feels they're needed to make the film bankable. Believe it or not, given Tarantino wants to use the same cast, for his Star Trek take it's possible Paramount will blink and pony up; but, time will tell.I'm curious just how much Paramount is saving by picking a Lady Director (S.J. Clarkson) who has only done TV and cable network productions.
I can pretty much imagine that They are not paying her anywhere near top dollar.
So to me, it seems pretty chitty for Them to be balking on paying for BIG Name actors.
(especially when one of them already had a deal)
Paramount Pictures however, need to cash in on this re-energized Star Trek bandwagon if they wish to remain relevant.
And fans of the previous three movies would also appreciate it very much.
Do they really, though? Yeah, Beyond underperformed, but it was also badly undermarketed and following a critically controversial outing (with a long gap in between, to boot). Do those numbers produce a 'justified sense of projected ROI' for any Kelvin trek movie, or do they produce a picture of corporate mismanagement ruining a single movie's profit potential (which could be fixed for future films if only they pull the right lessons from the experience)?
Seriously? Just because there is a new Star Trek series on an fairly obscure streaming service that hardly anyone knows about and even fewer people watch, does not make Discovery “relevant” in 2018
Judging by Karl Urban's joke with Data over twitter,
He either doesn't care about Pine not being in the movie, or he knows that the news are making it seems worse than it is and his friend will be there. Or he just hopes that with Kirk out of the way, Mccoy will be the star
(...dream on! Captain Spock is the only plausible choice )What VOODOOXI said.
I'd argue that the movies are more popular, and thus make trek more relevant, than new series only available through streaming services, DVD or pirate copies. Not all the people are willing to watch series like that.
And really, we wouldn't have Discovery if it wasn't for the movies renewing interest for trek. You can't tell me the new series isn't more inspired by JJ's work than tos, even tptb admitted it (and they hired Kurtzman because of his work in the reboot).
Having trek on the big screen is more important, in this age where you have other franchises like marvel, star wars etc etc, than having it on tv ONLY.
I don't want to minimize Discovery because it's a good series if people give it a chance, but the fact they paint themselves into a corner by making the main character Spock's sister, and all that forced stuff about Spock and Sarek, is telling. It's like they dont think their series can exist and be successful on its own so they desperately ask the old characters for help.
First they said Spock wouldn't reappear and they wouldn't cast a new Spock, now they did and it seems like the second season will be about him . Wanna bet that their Spock will be more like a younger version of Quinto-Spock than Nimoy's? Just read what Kurtzman said.
Star Trek doesn't urgently need the Pine-verse or the Reservoir-verse at this point, but Paramount needs Star Trek, on account of the studio sorely lacking spandexed super-champions of destiny and the like.
Similar threads
