CBS and Paramount officially back together

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by Amasov, Aug 13, 2019.

  1. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    King Daniel Beyond
    I guess it means we're gonna see thinly disguised USS Discovery sets standing in for the Kelvinprise 1701-A, or whatever direction they choose to go in for the next film. It's Star Trek V and VI all over again!:p
     
    Nerys Myk likes this.
  2. Tomalak

    Tomalak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    Manchester
    They could use the Pike Enterprise sets and I'd be quite content!
     
    Danlav05, Amasov and Kelso like this.
  3. Amasov

    Amasov Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2001
    This is true! We never DID see the interior of the new Enterprise-A after all.
     
    Tomalak and Danlav05 like this.
  4. Danlav05

    Danlav05 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Rutland UK
    An alien lair will in fact be Picard's house redecorated :P
     
  5. JKM

    JKM Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    Agree with the comment on their being successful, but in point of fact, Pine was already under a contract with them for film #4. They wanted to renegotiate this at a lower salary supposedly because of Beyond's performance. Pine rightly refused. If they had just held up their contract with him things would've gone forward as far as he was concerned. As far as Hemsworth, who knows the story there, but I imagine he was asking for a large sum because of his MCU Thor. I'm not sure why they bothered, he has always struck me as a very much mediocre actor. They could've gone with someone else.
     
    Terok Nor, Tomalak and Grendelsbayne like this.
  6. ToyBoxComix

    ToyBoxComix Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2019
  7. Dukhat

    Dukhat Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    So? Most movies don’t make Avengers money. If that’s your bar for “successful,” then 99.9% of all movies ever made were total flops.

    The Abrams films were the most successful Star Trek movies ever made. And not just because of the money.
     
  8. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    I know Hollywood studios want to make all the money but the Avengers/MCU bar is absurdly high. It's like declaring yourself out of shape because you are not built like Dwayne Johnson. Not everyone is The Rock.
     
    saddestmoon likes this.
  9. Tomalak

    Tomalak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    Manchester
    It's widely acknowledged that a film with that kind of budget needs to take in approximately 2-3 times the budget to be considered successful. The budget generally doesn't include advertising costs, so the rule of thumb is to double the budget to get the break even point.
     
  10. Tomalak

    Tomalak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    Manchester
    Yeah, 2-3 times. Depends on the film. Beyond didn't seem to get a huge marketing push, but that Rihanna song and video won't have been cheap.
     
  11. Turtletrekker

    Turtletrekker Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Location:
    Tacoma, Washington
    I realized that my post was repetitive, that you already said two to three times, and deleted it. Oh well.
     
  12. Noname Given

    Noname Given Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    None Given
    Or ST:TMP and the Next Generation TV series. Set and prop reuse is nothing new; they did it for EVERY Trek incarnation (Including TOS).
     
  13. Khan 2.0

    Khan 2.0 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Location:
    earth...but when?...spock?
    Beyond really needed to reach that elusive 500m mark (500 for the 50th) but fell below even ST09 ww which at the time was hampered overseas by being a 'star-trek' movie (plus Beyond did approx 100m less than ST09 domestic!) . it could have done 500 but not with that story/villain etc - it was too inconsequential (and the initial trailer looked too silly) - it needed an iconic villain like the Klingons or the Borg plus maybe abit of timetravel/iconic characters returning as something of a celebration for the anniversary (obviously shatner but maybe not just him..i.e stewart, or spiner, or dorn etc - look how 7of9 & Data have been received in the Picard trailer - everyone loves it). just stuff to get the fans and even the non fans (who vaguely remembered enjoying the previous 2 so many years ago) excited and pumped up to see the movie - esp as everyone was losing their minds over Star Wars being back.
    they had from 2013 to come up with something that would delve into Trek history for a celebratory event to mark the 50th (like DrWho did) and they completely zero zero zero..destruct.. zero'd it

    but anyway hopefully its all going to turn out ok and we'll get what we should've got in 2016 with Picard and (hopefully) the Tarantino film
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
  14. Grendelsbayne

    Grendelsbayne Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Klingons, Borg, Time Travel AND Shatner (plus maybe stewart, spiner or dorn)? That would have been the most obvious fanwanky bs movie ever released and no one from the general audience would have paid a single cent to see it.

    Beyond could've been tweaked in various ways, but the best way to ensure it made more money would've been to:

    A) Not wait so long between 09 and ID and ID and Beyond - audiences don't have that long of an attention span.

    and B) Market it better.

    And it still might not have made 500m because Star Trek has just never been THAT popular. One could just as easily argue that ID got a boost from Cumberbatch more than it did from people deciding they really liked Star Trek after 09.

    (Also, secret option C: massively reduce the budget. That's really the only truly dependable way to ensure a Star Trek movie is profitable.)
     
    Lord Garth likes this.
  15. Khan 2.0

    Khan 2.0 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Location:
    earth...but when?...spock?
    Maybe.. but doing none of that didn't do too well either:shrug:
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
  16. JKM

    JKM Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    I don't love it. :barf:
     
  17. Sci

    Sci Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    Montgomery County, State of Maryland
    Mostly it means the continued march towards corporate consolidation into one vast monopoly that controls all levels of society is one step closer.

    Eventually, we'll all owe rent money to ViaFace-Disney Micro-Googple for breathing their patented oxygen supply.

    Oh, yeah, I guess they'll start making new Star Trek movies at some point.
     
  18. Grendelsbayne

    Grendelsbayne Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    Netherlands
    The Voyage Home outperformed Wrath of Khan by quite a bit (Also First Contact over Generations). Building the movies around 'what people know' is not a magic recipe for Trek box office success. And the idea that anyone in the general audience would've still taken Shatner seriously as Captain Kirk like a decade after he swerved his entire career towards being all about how old he is is just delusional.
     
    fireproof78 likes this.
  19. Danlav05

    Danlav05 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Rutland UK
    When I saw the DSC Enterprise I was slightly miffed it wasn't Pien's Enterprise

    So I say DO IT!
     
  20. Amasov

    Amasov Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2001
    I do wonder if this merger has increased the chances of us seeing Deep Space Nine and Voyager in high-definition. At this point, it wouldn't just be CBS footing the bill for the work required to make this happen.