Zachary Quinto: ‘No Guarantees’ For Another Star Trek Film

I like the Kelvin timeline and would be up for more movies but at the same time, I think the three we have now give us a good character arc for Kirk and the Kirk/Spock/McCoy relationships. I wouldn't be THAT upset if they stopped now.

 

Every time I see Quinto, I think he's going to start sawing off the tops of people heads and consume their super powers lol

 

"Ding Dong the Witch is dead!"

Although I liked 'Into Darkness' I was not so fond of the other two movies and Beyond was an incredibly weak entry.

I also agree that they pissed away time making these. The first movie was announced in 2006 and we didn't see it until 2009 and then another 4 years until the sequel and by the time they got round to the third movie they had to renegotiate the contracts of the two lead actors which had expired in this time.
There was never a clear direction for these films, there was not a "trilogy" laid out, which might have helped. The studio wanted a Guardians of the Galaxy type film for the third movie which was painfully obvious to some with Beyond's 1st trailer. What these films represent is an apple fallen far from the tree. I'm very pumped for 'Discovery' but I think these films have put future movies in a difficult corner to crawl out of.

 

I see no reason why the films had to connect, or why the studio needed to develop them in sequence, or why they had to be released back-to-back-to-back.
Those are all artificial distinctions that could have had an unknowable impact on the film's box-office receipts.

 

There are so many big dollar, continuing story line movies, that the Abrams films have gotten lost in the shuffle. Audiences don't need to rush to see them because they aren't waiting for the next chapter in an ongoing story.

 

Star Trek is an attractive enough property that - if it is marketed correctly - it doesn't need some big bow to tie it all together.

 

Twenty or thirty years ago, you would have been correct. Now, not so much.

 

I disagree - a poorly marketed film managed to break even, although it had no clear ad campaign, no clear indication of plot,and poorly emphasized it's marketable stars.

 

Eventually. Beyond hasn't broken even yet. Whatever profit it eeks out will be small.

If its an attractive property in the here and now, how much advertising should it really need? As far as marketing goes, it attached itself to the MLB All-Star game here in the US. And it was wallpaper of commercials on a lot of channels leading up to its release.

Continuing story lines are in vogue now.

 

If I was a Paramount exec, I think I'd be having this internal monologue:

"We try to bring in new fans and the old fans hate it. But hey, we made some money."
"We try to bring back the old fans with familiar story beats, and the old fans hate it. But hey, new fans dug it and we made some more money."
"We try a new story and make the familiar characters more like they used to be, for the old fans. They hate it, new fans didn't connect so much, and we didn't make much money this time."
"We're not gaining any ground with this thing, so let's sit on it a bit and see if they hate that."

Just sayin'.

 

Said it before -- Kirk vs. The Borg would be a moneyfest.

 

Well, a change of management and a breath of fresh air I think will do Paramount good in the future.

At this stage, Jim Gianopulos is still looking for his 2ic.

I'm sure the new CEO and his team will need say at least 3 months to be comfortable with Paramount current state of affairs, production slate etc.

Given 2017 will have a Transformer movie, 2018 a Mission Impossible movie, what are the odds of a Star Trek movie in 2019? Given that another Transformer movie was apparently been slated for 2019, before the change of leadership was announced.

I think best case scenario is 2019 if they decide to do Transformers-Mission-Trek continuously in that order.

Otherwise, 2020 for a 4th movie with the current cast.

What would it take for a 2019 Trek movie?

A formal greenlight by say May 2017, script by say end of 2017/early 2018, filming to start by say Feb/Mar 2018 and post-production staring by say July/Aug 2018 for a May 2019 release.

 

I imagine we haven't heard anything about Star Trek 4 because Paramount has had a huge shake up in management over the last 3 months. The current CEO has only been in the job for less than 3 weeks. They have a major crisis to deal with financially, so it may take them a few months yet to decide on Star Trek.

 

At this point, I'll take it.

 

In my opinion the people at Paramount/Bad Robot made one big mistake: too much time between ST09 and STID. We had momentum after the release in 2009 but they failed to capitalize on their success. Star Trek was ‘cool’ again. It got people talking. But STID was released 4 years later so a lot of people lost their interest again.

It’s probably not the only reason why Beyond failed to attract a huge audience, but I think it’s an import factor.

 

I've been saying this going on eight years now.

 

Same here.

 

It would be nice if someone was listening.

 

Let's face it, this is the last roll of the dice for the Kelvin movies, (if it hasn't happened already) they might as well go 'all in' and play their strongest hand. Either the Borg or Klingons, even both - something famous and recognisable. Normally I would be in the 'gimme something new' camp, but we really need a decent box office hit for this timeline to survive. I know people will say Klingons have been done to death, but I don't accept there's no decent story that can be written involving them.

 

Remember that silhouette image of the Death Star in orbit in Rogue One? I want to see that with a Borg cube, set behind the New York or London or Paris skyline.