• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Trek-XI is gonna flop f***** big!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes...they missed a golden opportunity to inform a bunch of people who already knew about the movie.
It's not just about the fans who attended the convention. 3,000 members of the media also attended, and not just from popular websites like IGN, ComingSoon.net and Comic Book Resources. There was also TIME, Variety, Entertainment Weekly, the Los Angeles Times, AMC's program Shootout and other notables. And many of these people could be posting articles about Star Trek right now, as they have for Watchmen.
 
Last edited:
You may want to check your definition of "shill" or point out where anyone here is getting paid by Paramount or anyone else connected with the movie.

I'll wait.
And one has to wonder why Beyerstein isn't being paid the big money by the studios considering what a marketing genius he apparently is.
 
The hype from SDCC transcends just the people who attend the con.

It doesn't.

Why does every website have nonstop coverage?

They don't. In the grand scheme of things, it's fairly inconsequential.

Yes...they missed a golden opportunity to inform a bunch of people who already knew about the movie.
It's not just about the fans who attended the convention. 3,000 members of the media also attended, and not just from popular websites like IGN, ComingSoon.net and Comic Book Resources. There was also TIME, Variety, Entertainment Weekly, the Los Angeles Times and other notables. And many of these people could be posting articles about Star Trek right now, as they have for Watchmen.

And none of the people who read any of those publications are going to make their decision NOW to see a movie in May.
 
It's not just about the fans who attended the convention. 3,000 members of the media also attended, and not just from popular websites like IGN, ComingSoon.net and Comic Book Resources. There was also TIME, Variety, Entertainment Weekly, the Los Angeles Times and other notables. And many of these people could be posting articles about Star Trek right now, as they have for Watchmen.

And none of the people who read any of those publications are going to make their decision NOW to see a movie in May.
That's a consequence of Paramount's failure to present at SDCC. They must think they're smarter than all the other studios.
 
No...people (normal people) don't make movie plans 10 months in advance.
 
That's a consequence of Paramount's failure to present at SDCC. They must think they're smarter than all the other studios.

Because that convention has made or broken so many big films. Such as...

...Go ahead, I'll wait while you come up with a name.

"Iron Man?" Hah! Just because some fanboys got excited about it at Comic-Con had no demonstrable effect on the business that it did - the film was marvelous, well-reviewed and widely covered by the mainstream press because of Downey's involvement.

In fact, you can't point to a single movie that did better or worse business because of its reception at Comic-Con.

No doubt you can find some more quotable folks who agree with you, but that still won't make it so. :cool:
 
What will you say if the movie isn't the tremendous success you think it will be?

Because of its budget it will have to do pretty well to not be seen as having underperformed.
 
That's a consequence of Paramount's failure to present at SDCC. They must think they're smarter than all the other studios.

Because that convention has made or broken so many big films. Such as...

...Go ahead, I'll wait while you come up with a name.

"Iron Man?" Hah! Just because some fanboys got excited about it at Comic-Con had no demonstrable effect on the business that it did - the film was marvelous, well-reviewed and widely covered by the mainstream press because of Downey's involvement.

In fact, you can't point to a single movie that did better or worse business because of its reception at Comic-Con.
And you can't see the forest for the trees. Forget about the cost-benefit number-crunching. That's just a smokescreen to hide what you won't admit--that Paramount has blundered by copping out at SDCC this year. Abrams' sheepish explanation that "the effects aren't done" is only slightly better than "the dog ate my homework." More likely, they didn't want to be shown up by Warner Bros.' killer Watchmen reel.
 
they didn't want to be shown up by Warner Bros.' killer Watchmen reel.

And what's so wrong about that? "Iron Man" was the talk of last year's con. "Watchmen", I presume, was the talk of this year's. They are both comics related films, prime fodder for a major comics convention.

Would you prefer comics fans badmouthing ST XI at Comic Con because it dared to try to compete with their interest in a comics-related movie?

"Watchmen" opens March 6, doesn't it? First things first.
 
they didn't want to be shown up by Warner Bros.' killer Watchmen reel.

And what's so wrong about that? "Iron Man" was the talk of last year's con. "Watchmen", I presume, was the talk of this year's. They are both comics related films, prime fodder for a major comics convention.

Would you prefer comics fans badmouthing ST XI at Comic Con because it dared to try to compete with their interest in a comics-related movie?

"Watchmen" opens March 6, doesn't it? First things first.


I dunno if you're conceding there's no way the Star Trek movie could have looked as good as Watchmen or what, but Hollywood has pretty much long taken over Comic-Con. Any type of Star Trek presentation would have been welcome, if not expected.

Remember it was SDCC '06 when they debuted the poster with tos insignia and the gold and blue uniform. and last years was the panel with Nimoy and Quinto officially announced as Spock.
 
I dunno if you're conceding there's no way the Star Trek movie could have looked as good as Watchmen or what, but Hollywood has pretty much long taken over Comic-Con. Any type of Star Trek presentation would have been welcome...

I'm not conceding anything about "Watchmen" or ST XI. Paramount simply decided, no doubt after much discussion in boardrooms, that a Comic Con was not the most sensible place to spend precious marketing dollars for ST XI at this particular point in the continuum. Sounds like there was already lots of Hollywood at this year's Comic Con anyway.

...if not unexpected
Maybe Paramount will choose a different venue, something... unexpected(?) to promote ST XI?

Remember it was SDCC '06 when they debuted the poster with tos insignia and the gold and blue uniform. and last years was the panel with Nimoy and Quinto officially announced as Spock.
So? Those events suited the marketing strategy. And if ST XI was still a December movie we'd have had lots of ST XI publicity at Comic Con.
 
Oh, and I'm bored by the sombrero schtick. It was mildly humorous at first but wore thin very quickly. I like to run with a joke but know when to move on to the next bit. Move on to the next bit, please...

I`m one of the people who can still laugh about the sombrero. Ah, the joys of a simple mind. :p

If you don`t like it, ignore it. Simple as that.

In the end, this is another thread about some people actually wishing Trek XI will fail just so they can say they were right.

I`m an optimist, me. I laugh at the jokes as long as I can, and I don`t think of a forthcoming movie as a sure failure just because there hasn`t been much in the press on it ten months in advance.

Cheers.
 
I dunno if you're conceding there's no way the Star Trek movie could have looked as good as Watchmen or what, but Hollywood has pretty much long taken over Comic-Con. Any type of Star Trek presentation would have been welcome...

I'm not conceding anything about "Watchmen" or ST XI. Paramount simply decided, no doubt after much discussion in boardrooms, that a Comic Con was not the most sensible place to spend precious marketing dollars for ST XI at this particular point in the continuum. Sounds like there was already lots of Hollywood at this year's Comic Con anyway.
Why cede ground to the competition like Warner Bros., 20th Century Fox and Sony? I know that Paramount has cut jobs this year, but how cheap do they want to be? They must have provided hotel rooms for the young staffers at the Paramount booth. What's a few more? I can't believe that a potentially dynamite Trek presentation was vetoed because of costs.
 
BTW, there's an hour-long special about this year's Comic-Con on TV tonight and it repeats multiple times through next weekend. See SF&F for details.
 
I too think it is bad that they missed to present 'Star Trek' at the Comic Con.
They completely ignored 'Star Treks' comic-roots...
Oh...
Wait...
 
The hype from SDCC transcends just the people who attend the con.

It doesn't.
Yes it does. Don't be so arrogant.

Why does every website have nonstop coverage?

They don't. In the grand scheme of things, it's fairly inconsequential.
Your arrogancy never ceases to amaze me. Each and every entertainment website was covering the con non-stop for the entire time of the convention.

And none of the people who read any of those publications are going to make their decision NOW to see a movie in May.
Nobody is talking about making a decision to watch a movie, all it is being said it needs to be in the public's mind longer and deeper than most other movies coming out next year. Trek has been getting a bad rap for the last decade or so, none of the other blockbusters like TF2, Wolverine or T4 has that. Nobody in the general public cares or knows that Berman and Braga are no longer the show runners. All they know that Trek is no longer the powerhouse it once was, a thought that needs to be eliminated. Starting to promote an already heavy shouldered movie just a few months ahead of releasing it won't help matters any.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top