Karl Urban : Star Trek 4 would be a blast.

[fireproof78]

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek2016.htm

Budget: 185 million
Domestic Gross: 158 million
Foreign Gross: 184 million

Based on the fact that "Hollywood Accounting" is a real thing, I have no idea if that is a success or not.

Given how they can add more costs to the film after release, we might never know.

I thought Beyond (for all its 'common-Hollywood-action' faults) was the most genuinely enjoyable of the reboot films for its attempt to get back to character and heart. I recently rewatched STiD, and it is as thin and meagre and underwhelming as I thought at time. More so. But sadly Beyond underperformed at box office. So I suspect Paramount is now going to understandably sit back and wait and see what happens with STD.

Likely as not, they will cut the budget, and keep a much tighter reign on how production is run.

Quality performer! Loved him in REDS.

One of the most underrated films of the last decade. So glad I saw it in the theater.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Amaris]

Star Trek 4 will happen. Beyond made a considerable profit (Budget was $185 million, and the film grossed more than $343 million worldwide, and that's not counting DVD, Blu-ray or digital sales), even if it wasn't a domestic box office powerhouse.

 

[Tosk]

Beyond made a considerable profit (Budget was $185 million, and the film grossed more than $343 million worldwide

The studio gets half (at best) of the box office take.

 

[Amaris]

The studio gets half (at best) of the box office take.

There will still be a Star Trek 4. Plus, budgets are often overinflated. It's why no film ever (reportedly) makes a profit in Hollywood.

 

[Tosk]

If you have no faith in the stated budget, why did you quote it in the first place?

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Beyond made a considerable profit (Budget was $185 million, and the film grossed more than $343 million worldwide, and that's not counting DVD, Blu-ray or digital sales

Beyond's budget was $185 million without marketing. A film's promotional budget will often be half of (or as high as) its production budget. So that's at least another $90 million (added to the $185 million) for advertising. Then the studio takes about 50% of the film's ticket sales in the U.S. (and Beyond's domestic box office was $158 million) and about 25% to 35% on overseas ticket sales (and Beyond's foreign box office was $184 million). In recent years, there’s been a stark decline in the number of physical DVDs and Blu-rays being sold, with the all time low for 2016 and 2017.

 

[F. King Daniel]

We all know Hollywood accounting is as much fantasy magic as what happens in the movies themselves. The only way we'll ever really know if Star Trek Beyond made enough is if they greenlight another one, and that'll probably take a little while longer than usual due to Paramount's financial crisis and another round of changes at the top. Anything until then is speculation.

That Eaglemoss are waiting for ST4 in order to release a model of the new Enterprise-A makes me think they think ST4 is happening - and unlike most of us, they actually do have connections to Paramount and CBS. Here's hoping.

 

[captainkirk]

That Eaglemoss are waiting for ST4 in order to release a model of the new Enterprise-A makes me think they think ST4 is happening - and unlike most of us, they actually do have connections to Paramount and CBS. Here's hoping.

That also makes me hope the design will change in the next movie.

 

[Kemaiku]

That also makes me hope the design will change in the next movie.

If it does, it will be more like the STID end refit, not the Beyond level of modification. The CGI model they made was very detailed and they won't be wasting any more money than necessary for minor CGI tweeks.

 

[Amaris]

Beyond's budget was $185 million without marketing. A film's promotional budget will often be half of (or as high as) its production budget. So that's at least another $90 million (added to the $185 million) for advertising. Then the studio takes about 50% of the film's ticket sales in the U.S. (and Beyond's domestic box office was $158 million) and about 25% to 35% on overseas ticket sales (and Beyond's foreign box office was $184 million). In recent years, there’s been a stark decline in the number of physical DVDs and Blu-rays being sold, with the all time low for 2016 and 2017.

You forget the magic of Hollywood accounting, as I mentioned in my post, and as @King Daniel Beyond mentions as well. If we go by what they purport to spend, few movies have ever made money. It brings to mind the question that if all of these movies are, at best, breaking even, where are they getting the money to make these new films that get heavily marketed, and yet only break even? Is it out of some sense of duty to the public?

The film made money. There will be a Star Trek 4.

 

[PixelMagic]

I'm not trying to be a negative nancy here, because I DO WANT Star Trek 4 with the Kelvin timeline crew. However, Paramount also had sequels to Terminator Genisys lined up, which are now canceled, and it made $100 million more on a budget of $30 million less than Beyond.

Now, of course, many other factors come into play, such as the fact that Star Trek (I think) is a bigger brand than Terminator, with a larger and more dedicated fan base. Maybe Beyond will keep making money for years and years while Genisys is pretty much done. Maybe Blu Ray and digital streaming sales for Beyond will be great.

Maybe J.J. can use his clout to get Star Trek 4 made that otherwise might not be. Hell, he doesn't seem to be doing anything, maybe he will direct it to finish up his saga. Having the director of The Force Awakens might give Trek 4 a boost in box office. J.J. Abrams is a house hold name the likes of Nolan and Spielberg these days. Maybe the good will from fans over Beyond compared to Into Darkness will give them some leverage. Maybe Discovery will be a huge hit and give them more confidence. Just many many factors. I wish they'd tell us something.

 

[captainkirk]

If it does, it will be more like the STID end refit, not the Beyond level of modification. The CGI model they made was very detailed and they won't be wasting any more money than necessary for minor CGI tweeks.

Surely that would depend on who does the effects? I believe Double Negative made a new model of the ship for Beyond, so if the next movie goes back to ILM, or even a different company like Weta, they'd model their own version.

 

[PixelMagic]

Surely that would depend on who does the effects? I believe Double Negative made a new model of the ship for Beyond, so if the next movie goes back to ILM, or even a different company like Weta, they'd model their own version.

It's definitely possible the 1701-A will get tweaked. I've had a look at the CG model, and the stuff that is seen by the camera is detailed nicely. However, there is no detail at all on the bottom of the secondary hull in the fan tail, so that would have to be worked on. The shuttlebay doors are also just plain without much detail. There are no spotlights on the back of the hull either.

CG models are easy (relatively speaking compared to a physical model) to change and tweak. If the director wants a change, like Justin Lin did for Beyond on the 1701, they will do it. If they are trying to save money, ILM or Weta can have Paramount request the current model from Double Negative and have it hero shot / close up worthy within a couple of weeks of work instead of starting over from scratch.

 

[Kemaiku]

It'll still be nearly 100% what we saw at the end of Beyond.

People need to let go of that 60's wooden model.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

You forget the magic of Hollywood accounting

Then why did you start by quoting film budgets and box office grosses to prove your point if you don't believe in Hollywood's accounting?

The film made money.

I've already proven that it didn't. And that's based on facts, figures and independent sources and not hopes and wishes. I wish it had though.

There will be a Star Trek 4.

There will be a Star Trek 14. Paramount hasn't decided yet if there will be a Star Trek 4. I'm hoping there is.

 

[ISS Enterprise]

The 1701A will be tweaked in next movie almost certainly as the prime 1701 and 1701A underwent tweaks on the interior just about every movie lol

The 1701A at the end of Beyond was rushed and purposely shown in shadows to leave room for future changes

It's my SINCERE hope the 1701A interior is far different than the 1701 and no doesn't have to look like 1960s. Just clean some stuff up

 

[Khan 2.0]

There will be a ST4 as Paramount only has TF, MI, and ST as their big movie franchises, and although it underperformed STB was still a critical hit and Paramounts top grossing movie of 2016. Plus TF5 is currently underperforming (STB did better than TF5 domestically)

 

[Amaris]

Then why did you start by quoting film budgets and box office grosses to prove your point if you don't believe in Hollywood's accounting?



I've already proven that it didn't. And that's based on facts, figures and independent sources and not hopes and wishes. I wish it had though.



There will be a Star Trek 14. Paramount hasn't decided yet if there will be a Star Trek 4. I'm hoping there is.

Because I'm a man of mystery, of enchantment, and because the film did make money.

 

[Jax]

Beyond is currently about $100 million in the green and will continue to climb.

Source?

Land of make believe...

I loved Beyond but there is no chance in hell, Beyond has made such a profit. Gross is not the same thing as profit.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Because I'm a man of mystery, of enchantment, and because the film did make money.

So you just threw some numbers around to make it seem like you had a valid point but when upon closer examination (and some third grade math) the same numbers disproved you, you doubted the same numbers you yourself quoted?!

the film did make money.

Monopoly money maybe.

Gross is not the same thing as profit.

It appears that for the laymen it is.