Reasons to be happy / not happy about a 4th film.

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

That's a fair question. One possible answer would be "completing the set". A trilogy is a more marketable commodity than two films.

I don't think that would make any sense. If they truly lost money, I can't see them wanting to make another film. Disney isn't chomping at the bit to make John Carter 2.

As for Orci: they also fired him as director and dumped his script.

But does that have anything to do with Star Trek Into Darkness? If it was truly a failure, why would they hire him in the first place?

We do know that as of this time, there is virtually zero news about anything big planned for the 50th anniversary next year. That is not an encouraging sign.

But that ball is squarely in CBS' court. They are the ones that actually own the franchise. So I still don't think that is indicative of Star Trek Into Darkness performance. If anything, I would think the incredible lack of interest in Star Trek: The Next Generation in HD is more damaging to whatever plans CBS has/had for the 50th anniversary.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

But they're not making a trilogy, they're making at least 4. They were so unhappy, that they planned at least two further films.

I heard they kept his script for a at least a while before finally discarding it, and Orci is still there as a producer. And to be quiet frank? Paramount were at least for a time willing to give a summer tentpole films over to a complete directing novice. Yes, I do think that shows they did have quiet a bit of faith in him. No offence to Orci, but I'd say an insane amount. It just seems the reality of that situation eventually caught up with them.

You're getting the same thing you got for the anniversary in 1991 - a movie. Unlike in 1991, this one actually has some money behind it because the studio thinks it will have legs. Anything more is up to CBS, not Paramount. So a lack of 50th anniversary shows Paramount was unhappy how exactly?

Please tell me you're not getting these arguments off Facebook.

 

[fireproof78]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I still don't think Paramount was as unhappy as the interwebs portray them. Why would they hire Orci to write and direct early in the process if they were unhappy? Why would they give Pine and Quinto raises for the upcoming film if they were unhappy? Why would they be spending another $180 million on Trek produced by the same people if they were unhappy?

Just doesn't make any sense.

That's a fair question. One possible answer would be "completing the set". A trilogy is a more marketable commodity than two films.

As for Orci: they also fired him as director and dumped his script.

We do know that as of this time, there is virtually zero news about anything big planned for the 50th anniversary next year. That is not an encouraging sign.

Given the faster turn around, and Paramount's desire to make more money, I see them taking a different direction from Orci because of what they wanted, not as any commentary on his previous work. The script wasn't what they wanted, and I would guess they would be nervous to giving a first time director a large project like Trek 3.

As for the 50th, who is that on? Is it Paramount or CBS? Personally, I don't want Trek 3 saddled with a lot of 50th baggage when the past two films have been criticized for too much reliance on past Trek history. I think a TV special would be more appropriate.

YMMV

 

[Amaris]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I think some people figure that Star Trek getting made is a foregone conclusion. I mean, even with it's very poor ratings, there were people who believe that Enterprise was entitled to 7 seasons just because it was Star Trek.

What some don't realize is that if Star Trek stopped making piles of money, it would die and stay dead until someone found a way to make it profitable again. Gene's "vision" or not, Star Trek needs money to survive.

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Why has three become the magic number?

Don't ask me, ask Hollywood marketing.

Paramount believes that Star Trek Beyond has the potential for being a watershed in the Trek movies. That is why they have granted an option for a fourth sequel.

We can only wait and see...nothing I've seen or heard says that we're about to have such a moment (at least not in a positive way). Remember, Paramount wasn't happy with the returns on Into Darkness. And JJ had to fight just to get it made to begin with.

Did he?

Yes, Paramount only agreed to make the film if it were shot in 3D to increase it's BO take. Otherwise they weren't going to do it.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-trek-into-darkness-would-not-have-been-made-in-2d/

This on the heels of the fiasco that aborted plans for an all-media Trek reinvention soured JJ on Trek (which he wasn't to fond of to begin with), and he jumped ship for Disney to do Star Wars.

The concept that Abrams films need to fail in order for a TV series to get made may backfire because CBS might see no reason to risk money on a probably failure.

CBS isn't going to make a Trek for TV. Certainly not as long as Moonives is in charge. It isn't happening.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Yes, Paramount only agreed to make the film if it were shot in 3D to increase it's BO take. Otherwise they weren't going to do it.

But a Star Trek 2 would've been made by someone. The first one was the biggest box office draw the franchise had ever seen. Abrams obviously liked the material or else he would've walked away and had someone else direct. Plus, shooting in 3D costs more and Paramount may have shot themselves in the foot by forcing the issue.

And I thought the whole story about Abrams and the franchise had been debunked?

 

[Trekkin]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

You know, I don't think the trilogy thing is actually true in Hollywood. Can anyone actually name a trilogy outside of The Godfather? Even The Lord of The Rings ended up with an Ep I,II, and III with 'The Hobbit', Star Wars is going for Ep VII, and even Mad Max, Poltergeist and Jurassic Park got fourth films. Taken advertised itself as a trilogy, but then stuck in sequel bait in case Neeson ever needs some quick cash. Nowadays movie series just tend to go on, and on...

The film was already being made when Paramount said 'do it in 3D.' And Abrams did make it in 3D, and afterwards said he found new respect for it. Where is the so-called 'fight to make it' there?

At worst, they would have sacked him and got somone else.

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

That's a fair question. One possible answer would be "completing the set". A trilogy is a more marketable commodity than two films.

I don't think that would make any sense. If they truly lost money, I can't see them wanting to make another film. Disney isn't chomping at the bit to make John Carter 2.

It's "Sunk Costs" thinking at work. If the first film flops, the thinking is "cut your loses and get out now". If the second film is perceived as an underperformer, the thinking becomes "well, we've come this far...make #3 and at least get the marketing boost for having a trilogy."

As for Orci: they also fired him as director and dumped his script.

But does that have anything to do with Star Trek Into Darkness? If it was truly a failure, why would they hire him in the first place?

It wasn't a complete failure, it just underperformed (obviously it didn't outright flop). This made the suits concerned, and whatever they saw about what Orci had in mind for 3 made their concerns worse, so they yanked him and his script and started over with the clock ticking for a firm release date. You don't do that if you are confident in your franchise.

We do know that as of this time, there is virtually zero news about anything big planned for the 50th anniversary next year. That is not an encouraging sign.

But that ball is squarely in CBS' court. They are the ones that actually own the franchise. So I still don't think that is indicative of Star Trek Into Darkness performance. If anything, I would think the incredible lack of interest in Star Trek: The Next Generation in HD is more damaging to whatever plans CBS has/had for the 50th anniversary.

TNG HD not selling well was the "final nail". It was far from the first nail. 50 year anniversary is a Big Deal. And we have NOTHING special planned for it. That is not an indication of confidence in Trek by the rights holders. It just isn't.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I still don't think Paramount was as unhappy as the interwebs portray them. Why would they hire Orci to write and direct early in the process if they were unhappy? Why would they give Pine and Quinto raises for the upcoming film if they were unhappy? Why would they be spending another $180 million on Trek produced by the same people if they were unhappy?

Just doesn't make any sense.

That's a fair question. One possible answer would be "completing the set". A trilogy is a more marketable commodity than two films.

.

Why has three become the magic number?

I don't think it has. This summer alone, we're getting a fourth Jurassic Park movie, a fourth Mad Max movie, a fifth Terminator movie, and a fifth Mission: Impossible movie. And apparently there's a fifth Underworld movie in the works as well.

And need I mention The Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc.? None of which were confined to three movies.

As for the 50th Anniversary . . . I think the Big New Major Motion Picture is the centerpiece of the 50th celebration, just like The Undiscovered Country was for the 25th Anniversary.

A TV special or coffee-table book or something would be nice, too, but that's just the icing on the cake. Paramount does have something big planned for the 50th Anniversary.

It's called STAR TREK BEYOND.

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Yes, Paramount only agreed to make the film if it were shot in 3D to increase it's BO take. Otherwise they weren't going to do it.

But a Star Trek 2 would've been made by someone.

Would it? Apparently not, according to JJ. They were willing to walk away if he didn't deliver a 3D movie.

Abrams obviously liked the material or else he would've walked away and had someone else direct.

Once he was committed, he had to carry though, or he could have killed his career. He doesn't have the kind of H-wood clout to withstand breaking a contract.

Plus, shooting in 3D costs more and Paramount may have shot themselves in the foot by forcing the issue.

Nevertheless, they were prepared to do just that.

And I thought the whole story about Abrams and the franchise had been debunked?

JJ is on record as not really liking Trek. This isn't new news.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

TNG HD not selling well was the "final nail". It was far from the first nail. 50 year anniversary is a Big Deal. And we have NOTHING special planned for it. That is not an indication of confidence in Trek by the rights holders. It just isn't.

So you're saying that the two highest grossing Star Trek films were somehow one of the nails? That simply doesn't make any sense.

There is a $180 million dollar film coming, I'd say that would represent some confidence in the product.

Other than that, it seems like this will be similar to every other Trek anniversary, books and merchandise designed to bilk more money out of the diehards.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Why has three become the magic number?

Don't ask me, ask Hollywood marketing.

I'm asking you because you've made the claim. Do you have something to back up the claim that "Hollywood marketing" loves trilogies.

Did he?

Yes, Paramount only agreed to make the film if it were shot in 3D to increase it's BO take. Otherwise they weren't going to do it.

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-trek-into-darkness-would-not-have-been-made-in-2d/

Sounds more like a back and forth between a director and studio. More like JJ agreeing to make the film their way, rather than the studio threatening to pulling the plug.

"The studio said, 'You have to make it in 3D if you're going to make it, for economic reasons'," Abrams said. "But my feeling was I didn't like 3D. So the idea of doing Star Trek in 3D was ridiculous.

"But that was very helpful in some ways, because it let us work with stereographers and the 3D crew in a way that didn't assume we just loved 3D."

"I have trouble with 3D sometimes. I can't see it right; I get a headache; it annoys me; I hate the glasses; I hate the fact that things get so dim," he explained.

"I approached it very cynically. And the fact is that we've been using techniques that haven't been used before in 3D. They've figured out things. They've made enough movies now with this new process that they can understand ways to eliminate some of these problems.

"Things like breaking shots into zones, 3D zones, using multiple virtual cameras. A lot of this has made me a believer, whereas before I was really against it… There's this myth that if you don't shoot the movie in 3D it doesn't look good. Actually, the opposite can be true."

Not quite the same as the clickbait headline implies

This on the heels of the fiasco that aborted plans for an all-media Trek reinvention soured JJ on Trek (which he wasn't to fond of to begin with), and he jumped ship for Disney to do Star Wars.

He's still producing the next film. And was instrumental in hiring Justin Lin. He's still on board.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

And we have NOTHING special planned for it. That is not an indication of confidence in Trek by the rights holders. It just isn't.

Sorry, I have to belabor this point.

We do have SOMETHING planned for it.

The multi-million dollar new movie.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

JJ is on record as not really liking Trek. This isn't new news.

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/bp/j-j-abrams-star-trek-too-philosophical-192548775.html

However, now that Abrams is completely entrenched in the "Star Trek" universe, he's a full-fledged Trekkie.

"'Star Trek' is my favorite show of all time," he admitted. "But for some reason it never clicked with me until I started working on it, and then I fell in love with it."

 

[bbailey861]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I'll be in the cinema for the third and fourth, and I'll have my blurays not long after. MOAR.

Me, too.

 

[Phantom]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Why has three become the magic number?

I don't think it has. This summer alone, we're getting a fourth Jurassic Park movie, a fourth Mad Max movie, a fifth Terminator movie, and a fifth Mission: Impossible movie. And apparently there's a fifth Underworld movie in the works as well.

And need I mention The Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc.? None of which were confined to three movies.

Not the point I was making. Nothing says you have to necessarily stop at 3. But being able to tout a "trilogy" tends to give a nice bump in sales. 3 also happens to be the most common number of films for a basic star signing (with options to extend).

As for the 50th Anniversary . . . I think the Big New Major Motion Picture is the centerpiece of the 50th celebration, just like The Undiscovered Country was for the 25th Anniversary.

Then where's the hype? Where's the buzz-building? "50 years next summer" advertising in trade, on screen, etc? The "anniversary push" should have started by now.

A TV special or coffee-table book or something would be nice, too, but that's just the icing on the cake. Paramount does have something big planned for the 50th Anniversary.

It's called STAR TREK BEYOND.

That remains to be seen. As several other people besides I have noted, given the events of the last year or two, there is reason to be skeptical.

He's still producing the next film. And was instrumental in hiring Justin Lin. He's still on board.

GR was nominally "on board" with Trek until he died. Effectively, he'd been benched since TMP. Only this time, JJ benched himself.

Note everything that is happening now with Star Wars: film television, novels, comic books, etc. All interconnected and interrelated. This is the game plan he had for Trek, but CBS wouldn't play ball and now JJ is working on the franchise he wants to do, leaving Trek for his production company.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

"Make it in 3D or else" doesn't equate to "fought to get it made". No, the studio wanted to take advantage of the 3D fad. You know the Avengers: Age of Ultron was made in 3D. Did Joss Whedon have to fight to get that movie made as well? This just seems like more wishful thinking. "Star Trek Into Darkness was a failure because I think it was a failure, despite the critical and commercial success it achieved."

I'll be in the cinema for the third and fourth, and I'll have my blurays not long after. MOAR.

Me, too.

Me three.

 

[bbailey861]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I have a bad feeing that star trek will get swallowed up by star wars. star wars has 3 huge films coming out which are sequels to the original trilogy and they have spin off films as well.

Okay? Star Trek doesn't need to hide from Star Wars, the films are being released six months apart.

Exactly. Let's be honest here. Most of us are going to end up seeing both movies in the theater, several months apart.

As I always say, STAR TREK and STAR WARS are not rival sports team. There's no rule that says you can't root for both.

Indeed, Sir.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Though I'm still unclear on why being a fan is so important? Harve Bennett wasn't a fan. Nick Meyer wasn't a fan. Rick Berman wasn't a fan. All seemed to work out okay.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Well, we haven't even celebrated the 49th anniversary yet. I'll be looking at what's in store for the 50th anniversary, you know, in the fall of next year. As has been pointed out, in this thread and repeatedly before, there'll be at least a new film to be watching.