Abrams: Star Trek Into Darkness Problems
- Thread starter TrekToday
- Start date
- Status
I love Trek's ongoing identity crisis. It has always been a niche product with a relatively small audience. But Paramount keeps trying so hard to turn it into something it never was, setting box office goals it can not achieve. I think they should step back, reduce the expectations, and finally do a show targeting their actual core audience.
They could do amazing, inteligent sci-fi stories if they didn't have the goal of making it a blockbuster.
They could do amazing, inteligent sci-fi stories if they didn't have the goal of making it a blockbuster.
Yeah, I can totally see Paramount going back to making cheap two part episodes as films and making way less money just to appeal to a small portion of the trek fanbase. I mean it worked so well the last time.
What didn't work was giving Stewart, Spiner, Logan and Baird more than half the production budget as salary, and expecting more than 100 million box office for what was basically a two part episode with better effects.
And what now will not work is trying to appeal to a weird target audience mix of Star Wars and Fast and Furious fans, people that for some reason want sci-fi mixed with motorcycles and 90s hardcore hiphop. Evenue mor so as, acording to Pegg, the trailer is misleading. It will not achieve the box office result to justify its budget.
And what now will not work is trying to appeal to a weird target audience mix of Star Wars and Fast and Furious fans, people that for some reason want sci-fi mixed with motorcycles and 90s hardcore hiphop. Evenue mor so as, acording to Pegg, the trailer is misleading. It will not achieve the box office result to justify its budget.
They should turn Star Trek into fan fiction?
More serious questions: How would Paramount go about defining what (or who) the "actual core audience" for Star Trek is, in order to target it? Where are the boundaries defining such an audience? Who's in, and who's not? Who gets to decide?
From the way this kind of discussion has always tended to go, I have a feeling I'd find myself sorted outside the target group, which means that the "actual core audience" for Star Trek that people like to talk about... well, it's pretty darned tiny, isn't it? And if that is indeed the case, why would Paramount even want to bother? What's in it for them?
It's been working for them so far.
]
Except the last two movies, which did.
I don't recall them dropping any Onyx tracks in STID
What is wrong with motorcycles? Why can a person who likes F&F not also like Star Trek? (I like both.)
Gee, how did I know that was coming?
STID underperformed relative to their expectations.
Which were?
Source?
A quick Google search came up with these, i.e.:
http://www.ew.com/article/2013/05/19/box-office-report-star-trek-into-darkness
http://www.technologytell.com/enter...darkness-underperforms-still-tops-box-office/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/weekend-box-office-star-trek-into-darkness_n_3303306.html
http://sciencefiction.com/2013/05/2...rms-while-iron-man-3-sets-box-office-records/
http://www.ew.com/article/2013/05/19/box-office-report-star-trek-into-darkness
http://www.technologytell.com/enter...darkness-underperforms-still-tops-box-office/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/19/weekend-box-office-star-trek-into-darkness_n_3303306.html
http://sciencefiction.com/2013/05/2...rms-while-iron-man-3-sets-box-office-records/
Higher.
A lot of these are analysis done by those media sources rather than a direct quote from someone at Paramount saying it underperformed to their expectations. A lot of those articles also source other articles, which gets you to this: http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/star-trek-darkness-cant-hit-warp-speed-box-office-92566/
It's the closest to an actual quote from Paramount on the matter:
So my asking for a source wasn't just for the raw numbers or some two-bit rags assumptions on them. I wanted a studio source for the assertion that ItD underperformed to their expectations — a direct quote from Paramount or official statement on the matter.
Because I see naysayers always state "underperformed to their [studio] expectations" yet never cite an actual, legitimate source.
Are you new to the movie business?
Studios don't do bad news on their own franchises.
If you're looking for a direct quote then even Fant4stic didn't "officially" disappoint...
Very much so.
While putting aside the condescending tone of the question, I understand how the movie business works. I also have a clear understanding of PR, marketing and spin.
But what I see is a constant assertion of claims that aren't really backed up by a viable source.
Last edited:
You are not going to get a signed statement by a Paramount executive saying so, but the numbers speak for themselves.
The movie got an increased production and marketing budgets. That indicates that the studio expected to build its audience (and make more money out of the sequel). Its domestic gross was lower, so they clearly didn't hit that goal.
If you also remember that the average ticket price went up in the interim period, it becomes pretty obvious that an 80 million increase in the take was less then what they were aiming for...
- Status
Similar threads
