Is Trek popular enough to be a Summer Blockbuster?
- Thread starter 22 Stars
- Start date
Which itself was over twenty years ago.
ST 5 tanked because it was an awful movie, not because it was released in the summer. On the record, Trek's been no more or less successful as a Fall/Winter release than as a Spring/Summer.
Of course, everything's changed - the Christmas releases these days would crowd and dwarf the old Trek films just as effectively as the Memorial Day flicks would. If this movie isn't really really different from the old Franchise (and it apparently will be) there would be no point in releasing it theatrically at all.
^ I totally agree, I guess what I'm trying to say, after seeing how perfectly Trek IV worked on all fronts, financially, and in public appeal and accessibility, it's hard to feel perfectly confident that the new Trek can do that (I think it will actually) and do it in the bright light and heat of the Summer Blockbuster season.
Commander Fotze
Ensign
deleted
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it can be. As everyone has said, Most people know TREK. Yes, there were some bad movies. And alot of non-canon add libs in the TNG movies. But JJ and crew want desperately to make this work, to be "their" Star Wars type of breakout hit. I belive they can do it!
The people I know don't go to that extreme, but I do get a sense from those I know that TREK is for geeky fanatics (Trekkies) and the movies are poor examples of film making.
I agree. Say what you will about TMP, flawed though it was, it was still an event because it was the first Trek movie and had a fair amount of hype. Very similiar to this Trek, which in its own way is a first. The first TOS movie with the same characters but different cast. First Trek movie to have a budget akin to other 'big-budget' films.
And the first Trek film attempting to come off in the most realistic manner possible, by all accounts.
Do I think it will do well at the box-office next May? Hell, yeah. Star Wars certainly wasn't a known commodity back in 1977, but look what it did. If Paramount starts promoting this thing properly and doesn't drop the ball giving it a push, it will do quite well.
I think you make a good point here and I hope I'm wrong, but TREK has a lot more baggage to surmount than the dreadful Batman films of the 90s. Bad films were all Batman had to contend with. Trek 11 is going to have to be a tremendously fun and superlative film to overcome the baggage that TREK has. A few are:
• Trekkies
• Over-stauration
• The film is being released in a time TREK is not popular.
• While TREK has proven it is marginally more than a niche market, it has never in anyway proven it can play in the same league as the 007 or Star Wars films, which is exactly what it will have to do, given it's 160 million dollar budget. It's one thing to be popular on free TV, another to get masses of people to pay to see it.
• Bad films (perceived bad films; I personally thought most were okay.)
• Made-for-TV type films. Paramount's under-valuing of the TREK film franchise continued way too long. It's going to be difficult to break this negative perception. Can one film do it? We shall see.
• Sci-fi is a not-so-hot genre; Batman is a comic book franchise, a genre that is extremely popular right now. Sci-fi (other than Star Wars) is not.
• Abrams has yet to prove he is a major directorial talent. Nolan IS a proven and talented director who has proven he can direct big production scenes and intimate moments. While I feel Abrams can handle intimate moments, I saw nothing in MI3 that shows he can handle--with visual style and creative scope--big production action sequences.
Still, I wish the film a lot of luck.
The only people I've ever met who "hate" Trek are always women, and they're women of the sort who despise anything SF/fantasy-related as being "childish". When asked what they find to be "mature", they rattle off the names of several reality shows and soap operas.
number6
Vice Admiral
I love how everyone has suddenly become some kind of expert on Hollywood and the film making business. People are throwing numbers around like they work for Variety.
That being said, I have no real idea about whether this film will be a block buster or not. I haven't seen it. Apparently Paramount expects that it will be because that's when the film is coming out.
Everyone knows something about Star Trek. It has an appeal that reaches across the globe. It the film is marketed the way big summer films are, then people may come and see it. If the film is good and people like it, more people will see it. I'm no expert, but a summer release usually means a late fall DVD release and I'm sure that there will be a big marketing push for that too. I mean, who wouldn't want the new Trek film on DVD for a stocking stuffer?? It sounds like pushing the film to summer and being able to do all those things just simply means more potential to make a lot of money off this film for Paramount. Whether it becomes a big blockbuster or not depends totally on the quality of the product.
That being said, I have no real idea about whether this film will be a block buster or not. I haven't seen it. Apparently Paramount expects that it will be because that's when the film is coming out.
Everyone knows something about Star Trek. It has an appeal that reaches across the globe. It the film is marketed the way big summer films are, then people may come and see it. If the film is good and people like it, more people will see it. I'm no expert, but a summer release usually means a late fall DVD release and I'm sure that there will be a big marketing push for that too. I mean, who wouldn't want the new Trek film on DVD for a stocking stuffer?? It sounds like pushing the film to summer and being able to do all those things just simply means more potential to make a lot of money off this film for Paramount. Whether it becomes a big blockbuster or not depends totally on the quality of the product.
Exactly. And it was a feat managed by TMP, ST II, ST IV and "First Contact", films that many people in the general public actually went back to see a second time. Strong opening weeks and a good long run in cinemas.
Cinema runs tend to be so much shorter these days, and many people are happy to "wait for the DVD". This film will hopefully make them need to see it ASAP.
Equals summer blockbuster. (Or winter Down Under.)
Its the marketing department's job to make Trek popular enough to be a summer blockbuster at least for the initial phase. After that, good word of mouth will determine whether it has legs.
Everything is unknown at some point, and has to be made popular by the usual means. Iron Man made $300 million dollars despite being a superhero "nobody's ever heard of" (outside of the halls of nerdom). The wholly original Hancock, WALL*E and Kung-Fu Panda made $200M+. Good marketing + worthwhile movie = big bucks.
In any case, how do you explain the success of Hancock, WALL*E and Kung-Fu Panda? Nobody's ever heard of them because they didn't exist.
Not that I've noticed. The normal folks I know regard comic book movies with slight contempt, but if there's something cool about the movie - like Robert Downey Jr.'s performance - their minds will change quickly and their prejudice will vanish. Their negative opinions about comic book movies are not strongly held - most people just don't care one way or the other. Star Trek has an incredible opportunity because the field is wide open.
Everything is unknown at some point, and has to be made popular by the usual means. Iron Man made $300 million dollars despite being a superhero "nobody's ever heard of" (outside of the halls of nerdom). The wholly original Hancock, WALL*E and Kung-Fu Panda made $200M+. Good marketing + worthwhile movie = big bucks.
You need to talk with normal folks more. All the normal folks I know had no idea why anyone would make a movie based on Iron Man. Remember, most people don't visit comic book stores.
In any case, how do you explain the success of Hancock, WALL*E and Kung-Fu Panda? Nobody's ever heard of them because they didn't exist.
Not that I've noticed. The normal folks I know regard comic book movies with slight contempt, but if there's something cool about the movie - like Robert Downey Jr.'s performance - their minds will change quickly and their prejudice will vanish. Their negative opinions about comic book movies are not strongly held - most people just don't care one way or the other. Star Trek has an incredible opportunity because the field is wide open.
Will Smith, every previous Pixar movie and Jack Black. Next question?
It probably won't be a blockbuster 'cause that kid playing Kirk is too effeminate looking.
I think that when they put "From the Co-Creator of Lost and the Director of Cloverfield" and "From the Writers of Transformers" in the credits that this movie will be popular enough to at least be #1 at the box office for the weekend.
Most movies are unknown commodities, so I don't agree with this notion that a film with familiar name appeal necessarily will be successful because of it. Sequels, well reviewed films, films with name stars, etc., have an advantage because these make it less of a gamble for audiences to decide what films to pour out good money for. In the case of STAR TREK, given it's rather tainted image and poor films of the past, familiar name appeal is not necessarily an advantage, and one of the reasons why TREK has a greater uphill climb than a lot of films--known and unknown.
You obviously have not seen Cloverfield.
