BREAKING: Paramount Sets Top Secret Star Trek Movie For Summer 2023; To Be Produced By J.J. Abrams
- Thread starter PixelMagic
- Start date
- Status
A 120M dollar film doesn't have to be cheap. It can still be a quality production. Just not a big dumb action movie.
Whenever people talk about what they like about Beyond, it's always: "I really liked the character interactions".
Most people don't say their favorite part was all the action schlock at the end.
Get rid of the expensive guest stars that no cares about anyways (Cumberbatch, Elba, potentially Hemsworth). Use a hungry up and coming director that's eager to establish themselves as opposed to a big name (Abrams, Lin). Just these two things alone will probably save 20M+
Cut out most of the vapid gratuitous action and you probably save another 50M+ right there.
Most people don't say their favorite part was all the action schlock at the end.
Get rid of the expensive guest stars that no cares about anyways (Cumberbatch, Elba, potentially Hemsworth). Use a hungry up and coming director that's eager to establish themselves as opposed to a big name (Abrams, Lin). Just these two things alone will probably save 20M+
Cut out most of the vapid gratuitous action and you probably save another 50M+ right there.
But then they'd have to spend twice as much on marketing to try to sell people on a film with no big name and no spectacle!
With a few exceptions, I don't really think "stars" draw people any more. No one cares.
Do you really think anyone was going to see ST4 because Hemsworth was in it?
Trailers are lies. You can make just about anything look good.
It's been said that it costs nearly 200M to market a movie worldwide these days. That's ridiculous.
Give me a great trailer, good reviews, a good publicist and some efficient targeted advertising.
You don't need to hire Rihanna to make a pop song.
I'd about bet we'll be getting a multiverse movie. The question is, do they bring back Patrick Stewart (probably), but what about Avery Brooks, Scott Bakula and Kate Mulgrew? Do they keep them or recast them with younger actors? And who do they cast as Q? And how will the Borg and time travel be involved (since those were the money maker movies)
I'd say get all the Captains but of course they're not the only ones now - writing an 'all series' movie would be daunting now as there are twice more series (and then some) to involve.
Was easier when it was three shows in one the 24th Century, the 22nd Century then people from the 23rd Century you could bring back, some of whom survived to the 24th Century
Then - do you count Riker? Chakotay, Rios? The main character of Lower Decks isn't a captain, what about Dal?
Something tells me you were probably the only person in 2016 who didn't know who Idris Elba was.
This would not be an issue to me
THE NEXT STAR TREK MOVIE COULD BE A GIANT NO WAY HOME-STYLE CROSSOVER, J.J. ABRAMS HINTS
https://t.co/1O8q83cE6R
https://t.co/1O8q83cE6R
^ I think they are reading too much into what Abrams said. These were his exact words, as quoted in the article:
"Some new characters" and "areas that you've just never seen before" doesn't sound like there's any connection whatsoever to the current CBS Trek shows.
Kor
J.J. Abrams. said:
"Some new characters" and "areas that you've just never seen before" doesn't sound like there's any connection whatsoever to the current CBS Trek shows.
Kor
Cannot believe he'd leak that even if it were, or especially if it were, true.
I hope "areas that you’ve just never seen before" means they're getting away from Earth again.
It'd be nice if we see a lot of locations outside Earth's solar system by the end of the series.
They should keep the film and TV franchises separate, similar to TNG vs Bennett Trek.
I don't care that it's been seven years, your target audience for these films is much larger than the number of people casually aware that more Star Trek "stuff" has been happening over on Paramount Plus or someplace. And they've at large accepted Quinto, not Peck, as Spock.
(And yes, I'm biased. The movie franchise is where ST still has living potential for me at the moment. But they also shouldn't cripple their franchise by making it "seemingly" exclusive to a lot of stuff casual film-goers already know they're not going out of their way to see)
I don't care that it's been seven years, your target audience for these films is much larger than the number of people casually aware that more Star Trek "stuff" has been happening over on Paramount Plus or someplace. And they've at large accepted Quinto, not Peck, as Spock.
(And yes, I'm biased. The movie franchise is where ST still has living potential for me at the moment. But they also shouldn't cripple their franchise by making it "seemingly" exclusive to a lot of stuff casual film-goers already know they're not going out of their way to see)
- Status
Similar threads
