If Star Trek Has A Disappointing Box Office...?

[DeafPoet]

The difference being that there's a helluva lot more readily available material available to keep us busy than there was back in the day, plus the various fan films that toe the line much better with regard to what's come before. In other words, we no longer need Paramount for new onscreen material; it's now much easier to make our own (and in that respect, Roddenberry would be delighted, since he never trusted how Paramount viewed his brainchild).

Great, if you're satisfied with fan films, just cozy up to Phase II and be done with it. I like them too, but the thought of that being the only Trek out there depresses the hell out of me personally.

As for expense, with a high water mark of $1 million an episode, we're talking 150 episodes, with the ability to adjust the writing and format as you go along to respond to however the audience responds. And if James Cawley has shown nothing else, he's shown you don't need a million bucks to maintain some pretty good production standards, especially not with today's technology.

And those numbers would be great if they weren't just some stuff you made up.

From Variety:

sources estimate the average cost of a first-year drama rose from about $2.4 million per episode in 2004 to $2.8 million this year. You can see it on the screen, whether it be the massive set-within-a-set on "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," James Woods headlining "Shark" or "Jericho" staging a nuclear apocalypse.

Even the few sitcoms on the air come with bigger pricetags, as networks gravitate toward more single-camera comedies like "My Name Is Earl." Because of the method of production, they cost $1.5 million to $1.7 million per half-hour, as much as 35% more expensive than a multicamera comedy.

Yep. $1.7 for My Name Is Earl. $2.8 Million for your AVERAGE hour-long drama. Trek would be on the high side of that with all the effects you'd need. Not to mention the article cites $10 million marketing campaigns needed for new shows. This article is two and a half years old. It's more expensive now. Trek on TV is a bigger risk than this movie when you consider the potential returns of a major motion picture versus a show.

Also, James Cawley has done something remarkable. But what is his output? 5 episodes over almost as many years? Clearly not the same thing as an actual TV show.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

As for expense, with a high water mark of $1 million an episode, we're talking 150 episodes, with the ability to adjust the writing and format as you go along to respond to however the audience responds. And if James Cawley has shown nothing else, he's shown you don't need a million bucks to maintain some pretty good production standards, especially not with today's technology.

And those numbers would be great if they weren't just some stuff you made up.

You have hit on the most salient point.

Even the first seasons of TNG cost more than a million dollars a pop in 1987.

 

[Dayton3]

As for expense, with a high water mark of $1 million an episode, we're talking 150 episodes, with the ability to adjust the writing and format as you go along to respond to however the audience responds. And if James Cawley has shown nothing else, he's shown you don't need a million bucks to maintain some pretty good production standards, especially not with today's technology.

And those numbers would be great if they weren't just some stuff you made up.

You have hit on the most salient point.

Even the first seasons of TNG cost more than a million dollars a pop in 1987.

Actually that isn't correct.

Roughly one third of the costs of modern Trek episodes is amortized startup costs.

Actual production costs are far lower.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

It's hard to come up with any ideas considering this is going to be a huge cash cow.

Same here. I could spend my time worrying that the sun will rise in the west tomorrow but I find I have better things to do.

 

[Dayton3]

All indications are that 95% of "the base" are on board with this thing, so there's no justification for that worry.

I haven't seen evidence of this.

All the reviews I've read so far by self-acknowledged Trekkies call it a qualified success at worst and God's gift to sci-fi at best.

Also, I'd put this and other fan forums out there as all the evidence you need. Just about everyone's excited for this. The ones that aren't are just louder.

No offense, but I've heard rumors both here and elsewhere that saying negative things about the new Star Trek movie is shall we say "discouraged"?

Hope I did not break a taboo.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And those numbers would be great if they weren't just some stuff you made up.

You have hit on the most salient point.

Even the first seasons of TNG cost more than a million dollars a pop in 1987.

Actually that isn't correct.

Roughly one third of the costs of modern Trek episodes is amortized startup costs.

Actual production costs are far lower.

Do you know how "production costs" are defined by the studio accountants?

No, you don't.

In three days or so this will all be settled. Be here then, and see who knew what they were talking about and who didn't.

 

[DeafPoet]

And those numbers would be great if they weren't just some stuff you made up.

You have hit on the most salient point.

Even the first seasons of TNG cost more than a million dollars a pop in 1987.

Actually that isn't correct.

Roughly one third of the costs of modern Trek episodes is amortized startup costs.

Actual production costs are far lower.

Even if that's true (and I wouldn't mind seeing a link) it's still money that has to be spent.

 

[DeafPoet]

I haven't seen evidence of this.

All the reviews I've read so far by self-acknowledged Trekkies call it a qualified success at worst and God's gift to sci-fi at best.

Also, I'd put this and other fan forums out there as all the evidence you need. Just about everyone's excited for this. The ones that aren't are just louder.

No offense, but I've heard rumors both here and elsewhere that saying negative things about the new Star Trek movie is shall we say "discouraged"?

Hope I did not break a taboo.

Rumors? Well, case fucking closed then!

Look, they've had numerous public screenings of this. If you're a studio running a propaganda campaign you don't show it a month early to legions of fanboys with internet access.

 

[Tulin]

I haven't seen evidence of this.

All the reviews I've read so far by self-acknowledged Trekkies call it a qualified success at worst and God's gift to sci-fi at best.

Also, I'd put this and other fan forums out there as all the evidence you need. Just about everyone's excited for this. The ones that aren't are just louder.

No offense, but I've heard rumors both here and elsewhere that saying negative things about the new Star Trek movie is shall we say "discouraged"?

Hope I did not break a taboo.

I'd close your windows and lock your door, if I were you.

Such talk brings out the reptile foot soldiers of the Illuminati.

I'd like to say it was nice knowing you but, well.........

 

[Dayton3]

In three days or so this will all be settled. Be here then, and see who knew what they were talking about and who didn't.

Actually no it won't be.

Outstanding opening weekends do not make box office performance.

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier had a great opening weekend for example. Number One by a long ways.

Look, I'm just sounding a note of caution.

Don't be too shocked if someone is posting a thread here in three months titled

"Star Trek XI: What Went Wrong?"

 

[number6]

I've already bought tickets to two IMAX showings and plan on seeing a matinee the next day before I go to work.

Definitely two showings at least for me.

Gold Class next Tuesday - earliest we could get in, even though they start showing Thursday morning 7/5. A second trip will be with my dad(ST fan from day one in the sixties!)at a later time.

I can see myself doing one more trip after that, so that makes a possible THREE from me with a DEFINITE two!!!


Damn - just realized it's been twenty three years since I saw a ST film more than twice!!! Four times at the cinema for STIV in 1986.

I actually saw Nemesis in the theatre three times, because I kept falling asleep in the same place and wanted to see the whole thing on the big screen. The only Trek film I haven't seen multiple times in the theatre was V. And I brought a date to that.. Kinda embarrassing..I did not get laid that night.

 

[Borgminister]

Shoo fly, don't bother me...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Hope I did not break a taboo.

Nope. You were just wrong. So nu.

 

[Dayton3]

I've already bought tickets to two IMAX showings and plan on seeing a matinee the next day before I go to work.

Definitely two showings at least for me.

Gold Class next Tuesday - earliest we could get in, even though they start showing Thursday morning 7/5. A second trip will be with my dad(ST fan from day one in the sixties!)at a later time.

I can see myself doing one more trip after that, so that makes a possible THREE from me with a DEFINITE two!!!


Damn - just realized it's been twenty three years since I saw a ST film more than twice!!! Four times at the cinema for STIV in 1986.

I actually saw Nemesis in the theatre three times, because I kept falling asleep in the same place and wanted to see the whole thing on the big screen. The only Trek film I haven't seen multiple times in the theatre was V. And I brought a date to that.. Kinda embarrassing..I did not get laid that night.

Don't feel so bad.

I know some people who took dates to Star Trek V who never got laid again.

 

[Sector 7]

Don't be too shocked if someone is posting a thread here in three months titled

"Star Trek XI: What Went Wrong?"

^Which was the real agenda of your thread anyway.

 

[Aragorn]

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier had a great opening weekend for example. Number One by a long ways.

So a brand new movie at the box office being number one and beating out the number two movie (that has been out for three weeks) by just over a million dollars is a "long ways"?

 

[jefferiestubes8]

Even the first seasons of TNG cost more than a million dollars a pop in 1987.

Paramount sure have gotten their money's worth with syndication, VHS, & DVDs.
The TNG DVD seasons each were $130. list price !

They are still milking it as


Amazon has
'Star Trek: The Next Generation - Complete Series' (DVD - 2007)
Buy new: $249.99

 

[DeafPoet]

Don't be too shocked if someone is posting a thread here in three months titled

"Star Trek XI: What Went Wrong?"

You get no points for predicting a thread you're going to start yourself in two weeks.

 

[Dayton3]

Don't be too shocked if someone is posting a thread here in three months titled

"Star Trek XI: What Went Wrong?"

You get no points for predicting a thread you're going to start yourself in two weeks.

You can't tell anything just two weeks down the road.

Three months is another matter of course.

 

[Starbreaker]

It's hard to come up with any ideas considering this is going to be a huge cash cow.

Same here. I could spend my time worrying that the sun will rise in the west tomorrow but I find I have better things to do.

I'm guessing you also don't give a crap whether the rank insignias are gold or silver, or how long the Enterprise is either, like me. I just want to go see a good movie and go home and get some sleep.