They did get payed for the TV shows they did, you know...
Is it fair?
- Thread starter darkshadow0001
- Start date
They did get payed for the TV shows they did, you know...
Is it fair that the new actors playing Kirk and company in the new movie had to be the best actors who auditioned for their respective parts, whereas the actors in the prior set of TOS films were hired simply because they had played the characters in a TV series from nearly a decade prior?
That's a good alternative way of looking at it.
Now, the truth in what cooleddie said about breaks is that whether an actor achieves attention suddenly or as a result of a long slog through the business is that when their moment arrives they all have to either deliver or go back to selling vacuum cleaners door-to-door. As Connery supposedly told Reeve back in 1978, if you're not damned good in the first one you don't have to worry about the sequels.
I don't think it's fair we waited 16-22 years for bigger-budget STAR WARS prequels that were pretty much inferior to the originals. But we couldn't do anything about that either. Showbiz is a fickle mistress.
john titor
Captain
true although I remember generations made the second highest profit of any trek movie
True. GEN got mixed, so-so reviews from a lot of people but it did make money for Paramount. Quite a lot once you factored in overseas release and later VHS and DVD sales. It lived up to most expectations and was a moneymaker even if some fans and casual viewers didn't like it.
Well most of these actors (except Quinto) are not TV actors, they're
movie actors. So this is normal for them to go and land a big movie role.
Most of them have had to slug through years of other movies before
finaly getting into something this big. Quinto has done years of Heroes
to get to this point.
Each person has their merits and they're here for them.
movie actors. So this is normal for them to go and land a big movie role.
Most of them have had to slug through years of other movies before
finaly getting into something this big. Quinto has done years of Heroes
to get to this point.
Each person has their merits and they're here for them.
Quinto's done his time in other media before the TREK movie happened. He's been vetted. Even Karl Urban. The guy's been in lots of other things in recent years, both TV and theatrical.
Exactly. Each and every actor in this film did not just... walk up out of the
blue and get the part. They all came from somewhere, doing some movie
or TV show and that led to them looking good in the auditions and landing
the gig.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
The first couple of years of a series allow the cast to "grow into" their parts, sorting out their characterizations. "Series first" would have given us more polished and surefooted portrayals in the film.
Not really, by this logic any movie has less "polished portrayals" if it didn't begin first in a long form format as TV. If they're professionals and know their craft they don't need a TV show to sort out the ins-and-outs of who they're gonna be on screen.
There's no formulaic way to how a good production works or not.
Sharr
It did earn its money back, but the studio had to wait for dvd sales, rentals and international and US box office to get its money back. A movie really need to by made from and by crap crap for any studio not to earn back it money. Did Nemesis earn it like ala Transformers or Dark Knight no but it did after with time.
Ask Kirstie Alley or Robin Curtis.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
I really really doubt that. For one thing, they keep all that stuff separate. That way Paramount can write off NEM after the theatrical wraps, and take a loss. Then the homevid division can start earning and making money, but to figure it would pick up, what, the 120 mil it would need for breakeven? NEM was in the 40s domestic, and I don't know what it did overseas, but for a 65-70 mil feature, break-even would be 140-190, maybe higher given advertising.
Balderdash. Most successful shows feature actors and characters who work from the beginning.
Like TOS Trek, for example.
Nemesis cost $60Million and made $67Million Worldwide with $43Million of
that being domestic. And they do count DVD and rental sales toward recouping
a movies budget.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
No they don't. And a 67 mil on a 60 invest leaves you 60-120 mil short.
The lack of profit 67million brings a 60million production may be true.
But they most certainly do count both DVD and rental income to help
recoup budget. Especialy in a case where the box office under performed.
So many times you'll read something like; "But they hope to make some of
it back in DVD sales..." etc.
Similar threads
