And he only gets it back if the movie makes $600m+
Simon Pegg on The Future of Star Trek
- Thread starter Armus
- Start date
- Status
Day of the Doctor itself was a worldwide simulcast and had theatrical screenings which actually pulled in some serious money. There was also a special gala in London attended by everyone involved with the show to mark the event In addition to all that, the fiftieth anniversary was marked with a docudrama telling the story of the show's beginnings special DVD reissues, novel reprints, and a new comic miniseries. The anniversary year also included seven episodes plus a Christmas special in addition to the fiftieth anniversary special, the casting announcement of the next Doctor, and a visit to the show's set by Prince Charles to meet cast and producers.
Now compare that to Star Trek's fiftieth anniversary, which had a new movie and a novel trilogy to mark the event.
It seems to be most often cited by those who liked it more than Into Darkness, often used alternatively or hand in hand with the argument that it did poorly because Into Darkness turned off viewers.
It rather ignores that Beyond is the weakest of the three in user and critical reviews, and had a big drop-off in the second week suggesting poor word of mouth.
I knew it was in trouble when I saw reviews saying it was one "for the fans" - the whole point is to reach a wider audience.
An Idris Elba nude scene is all Beyond needed to crack a billion.
And with a nude Alice Eve 2 billion
We didn't even get a clothed Alice Eve.
Point of order, straight guys are not allowed to be that obviously gross any more, which is why I thought that the big sexy black man would be more of a money maker.
Star Trek: Transporter Malfunction where Anthony Mackie plays all the roles.
Exactly.
I'm in Europe and it was promoted enough here. At the time, I saw posters and clips in France, Italy, England and Germany. It was sufficient. Asian people got great promotion and the tour included most of the cast.
The Asian posters also were better quality and featured all the characters. So I'm not saying the us/international team couldn't have done better in some aspects, but I also recognize their struggle.
IMO, after st09 was successfully promoted and liked for 'not being your grandfather's star trek' , the fact beyond was promoted as a nostalgia movie for old fans only backfired... but Pegg can't blame that on the promotional stuff only because their movie is a bit like that and they promoted it like that themselves. When it finally came out and old fans were praising it as the best, and those were the ones who hated the first two, it isn't the kind of positive reviews that help a movie. Sorry but sometimes it's better certain fans hate your thing... not all the positive reviews are useful.
It's obvious to me that they were struggling to promote this movie to the general audience and make it look exciting. This is due, in large part, to the creative team not really having a clear idea of what they wanted their movie to be. The narrative of the movie itself is like that and makes it hard to promote it. This isn't to say the movie had nothing good, but it's like the creative team made it hard to promote those aspects.
I think the first 'fast and furious' vibe trailer was a misguided attempt to say that the movie wasn't a 'boring trek movie for for trek fans only', but then when people (including pegg&co) hated it they overcompensated by trying to reassure old fans that it was mostly for them. Then the Rihanna feature song was an attempt to attract a bigger audience too, but even poor Rihanna was forced to make a stupid video where she gotta reassure us that she's a real trek fan (tm).
Adding to the struggle, they had Idris Elba in the movie but couldn't successfully use him for promotion because you can't recognize him with all that make up. To overcompensate their frustration for not being able to show the actor, thus attract people thank to his popularity, they made another mistake: they released a promotional clip that spoiled Krall's identity ruining the big plot twist of the movie. That was a desperate move.
Like I pointed up before, the big promotional events (fan event and Dubai one) combined with Pegg&co interviews were also FAIL for catering to old fans only and completely erasing the female characters, especially when many were already getting the impression the movie sidelined Uhura to get back to the old trio dynamic (a move no doubt perceived by fans of the first two as the new team going backwards with the few innovations jj introduced just to cater to old fans who were silly complaining she had 'replaced' Mccoy) .
When they started to feature the women too in promotion it was too little and too late to repair the damage. Beyond had that image already and it doesn't help that those praising beyond were, again, mostly old fans who saw it as the 'most trek' just because of the nostalgia elements and the old school dynamics. Ironically, I don't find beyond really brings the old trio back the way those fans were claiming it did. Those fans essentially contributed creating a prejudice around beyond that was in part deserved, but also in part it was not a complete, unbiased, portrayal of the movie as a whole.
My point is that promotion is responsible but only in the limits of what Pegg&co created and how they promoted the movie themselves. Furthermore, judging by how old fans liking beyond actually damaged its image (because of how some of those people painted it), I'm unsure pushing it as a 50th anniversary gift for fans would've helped it make more money. If Pegg thinks trek fans have that power then I guess he doesn't have a realistic perception but it surely explains some things.
A lot of contributing factors hurt Beyond. Pegg would never want to admit.
Star Trek Into Darkness is a weak Star Trek movie. The Khan plot backfired. Into Darkness dId not generate interest for another movie. Then there is the gap. 4-3 years. Between Into Darkness and Beyond.
Star Trek beyond was a good Trek film, very sadly not good trek enough to bring in more people to see it like Star Trek 2009.
Star Trek Into Darkness is a weak Star Trek movie. The Khan plot backfired. Into Darkness dId not generate interest for another movie. Then there is the gap. 4-3 years. Between Into Darkness and Beyond.
Star Trek beyond was a good Trek film, very sadly not good trek enough to bring in more people to see it like Star Trek 2009.
How does that work? People go to watch it, are disappointed, so get their money back? Is that a thing?
Surely it's more likely people were like me, went to watch STID on opening weekend, were mortified how terrible it was, then didn't bother with Beyond (I watched about 4 weeks in, then watched again a week or so later)
..and they tell other people it isn't worth watching. Other people don't watch it.
Alternatively, people read the reviews by old fans saying it's the most trek because it's ditching what jj did in the first two. People who liked the first two don't watch.
Your experience is valid and I'm sure it was like that for many (I'd lie if i said I was 100% happy with stid as a sequel) but so is the experience of the people who actually liked stid. After all, it was successful. Numbers don't lie and it's reasonable to think that if beyond failed we cannot blame it on a previous movie that was successful.
The mistake by lin&co was precisely assuming the majority hated stid but it's simply not true and beyond proves that further because them giving the impression they were ignoring stid backfired more than anything.
The thing is we got beyond because stid wasn't a flop but we didn't get a fourth movie because of beyond's fault.
yes I'm going to be the one that brings up RT scores ..Audience score for STID 89%. BEY 80%.. (ST09 91%) so I think the whole ID caused Beyond to fail is abit 'nah' - sometimes its true (e.g. Matrix2/3, Prometheus/Covenant, Terminator Genisys/Dark Fate, BvS/JL, XMen:A/DP) but in ID case think most 'average Joe' audience who hadnt watched TWOK 200 times were satisfied/thought it was a pretty cool space action movie from the guy who was going to do Star Wars.
Beyond simply didn't look interesting enough for 400m+ box office
Beyond simply didn't look interesting enough for 400m+ box office
Last edited:
Beyond was just another action movie. It had nothing new. In the end it was very ordinary and a so so plot. It was doomed to fail with or without promotion.
Pegg can blame the marketing, but if I was in charge of the marketing, I'm not sure what I'd hang my campaign on. ST09 had the origin story aspect, STID had the mysterious villain and Kirk's quest for vengeance, Beyond had the destruction of the Enterprise and a lot of action. Then the writer and director publicly bash the trailer saying that it doesn't represent the movie at all.
But what were they supposed to use to promote the movie? What was the hook? The destruction of the Enterprise and the action were the only really marketable elements it had. The lame doomsday weapon and Krall's identity were both supposed to be twists, so they couldn't use those (not that it stopped them with the latter.) I enjoyed the movie, but I find it the least interesting and the least memorable out of the three.
But what were they supposed to use to promote the movie? What was the hook? The destruction of the Enterprise and the action were the only really marketable elements it had. The lame doomsday weapon and Krall's identity were both supposed to be twists, so they couldn't use those (not that it stopped them with the latter.) I enjoyed the movie, but I find it the least interesting and the least memorable out of the three.
Into Darkness was great, it felt like an event. Beyond was good, but it was Just Another Star Trek Movie.
Exactly. While I disagree with keeping Khan secret, there was more hype and interest. Like I said, Beyond's story just didn't have anything that strong to use as a hook.
Beyond also seems irrelevant now since CBS All access have what many will argue is high quality movie entertainment.
What do they have?
Well said. I also thought Beyond didn't have much of a Spock narrative, which the 1st 2 had and his conclusions were satisfying, he had more of a supporting role than what he had. The establishing, growing relationship with Uhura, his acceptance of his human side and learning more about the human condition and having friends who valued him was an important part of the JJTrek movies. I never thought Chris Pine's Kirk was ever compelling enough to take seriously, he seemed to be better off sattled with a gag or a comic moment than looking at him as a lead. Beyond was Kirk centric and I thought it hurt the movie for me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
