I am still a fan of a Thanksgiving weekend release. Lots of people might want a diversion from overspending and overeating.
Roberto Orci Not Directing Trek XIII
- Thread starter MvRojo
- Start date
There's nothing about my avatar which is in any way about you. If you're referring to the custom title underneath my username, that hasn't changed in seven years, so it's not about you, either.
And after I'd just said something about not baiting other posters, here you are again, baiting other posters. That'll earn you a warning for trolling. Comments to PM (which means 'Refrain from making any further smart-ass comebacks in open threads when the moderator asks you to do something.')
That's your third consecutive post, after you've been asked several times in the last day to refrain from triple-posting.
Warning for spamming; comments to PM. And that's all comments - no more in-thread sass from you, please.
I think trying to release a film around the releases of other films is going to end up being a futile practice.
Movie-going is bound to change a lot in the next five years. So much so, that I think studios and theaters are going to have to make some changes.
With both Marvel and DC opening the flood gates and new real Star Wars (and not just the main franchise), there's just going to be too much to compete with.
Plus there's going to be at least two more Avatars. More Terminators and Apes. More Pirates. The Turtles and G.I. Joe. More F&F. Bond is still kicking strong. As is Bourne.
There's also the real possibility that the Jurassic Park, Mad Max, nuGhostbusters, Peter Pan, Warcraft, and the new King Arthur series could all become tent poles.
In any case, 2015-2020 will be an era where there will literally be a major genre release every weekend. People well have an idea of what they're going to go out to the theatre for in any given year way ahead of time. So it'll be a little silly for a studio to try and "pick" a release date hoping it will help ticket sales.
The best they can do is put their best effort forward and hope to generate buzz. Paramount has always been a bit sluggish about promoting Trek. That is going to have to change, it will the deciding factor of how ST13 and beyond performs.
Movie-going is bound to change a lot in the next five years. So much so, that I think studios and theaters are going to have to make some changes.
With both Marvel and DC opening the flood gates and new real Star Wars (and not just the main franchise), there's just going to be too much to compete with.
Plus there's going to be at least two more Avatars. More Terminators and Apes. More Pirates. The Turtles and G.I. Joe. More F&F. Bond is still kicking strong. As is Bourne.
There's also the real possibility that the Jurassic Park, Mad Max, nuGhostbusters, Peter Pan, Warcraft, and the new King Arthur series could all become tent poles.
In any case, 2015-2020 will be an era where there will literally be a major genre release every weekend. People well have an idea of what they're going to go out to the theatre for in any given year way ahead of time. So it'll be a little silly for a studio to try and "pick" a release date hoping it will help ticket sales.
The best they can do is put their best effort forward and hope to generate buzz. Paramount has always been a bit sluggish about promoting Trek. That is going to have to change, it will the deciding factor of how ST13 and beyond performs.
Doctor Strange (Marvel + Benedict Cumberbatch), Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (Harry Potter spinoff), and Moana (next Disney animated film) are set for November releases, so even Thanksgiving weekend would be crowded.
I tend to agree. It will be very difficult to schedule a release around other major ones, especially if other release dates also shift. On the other hand, I'm less sure nuTrek III will compete with a lot of these titles... maybe I'm being to narrow minded here, but would a Bourne release on the same weekend as Trek really be a problem?
Yes, all well said. And I think that means that they need to pull out all the stops on this one.
I would say no if it were THE BOURNE LEGACY. Since it's one that has Matt Damon returning, I'd be concerned. Funny thing, it would be a coming to a full circle of sorts, Trek going up against the franchise that started the trend of post-9/11 heroes who were anti-authority figures.
A
Amaris
Guest
They need to put the same effort into it that toy companies once did on Saturday Morning cartoon commercials:
"YOU WANT THIS! You NEED this! It is THE MOST AWESOME THING IN THE WORLD! And if you don't have it, YOU'RE MISSING OUT ON THE BEST THING EVER!"
Do it that way, and people won't be able to resist.
Hot damn. I knew the future was somethin' else, but seeing it all listed away like that really opened my eyes.
You're right. Paramount's gotta market this franchise like it'll make dinner and take the trash out.
Frankly, I don't know what to believe. I've been following the twists and turns of ST3 and the only thing I'm sure of is that Paramount has no vision for Star Trek and got very lucky that Bad Robot agreed to produce the reboots.
From a purely business perspective, Paramount has very little mindshare with moviegoers--Transformers is the biggest they've got, and I'm not discounting that--but they're mostly losing the franchise wars.
From a purely business perspective, Paramount has very little mindshare with moviegoers--Transformers is the biggest they've got, and I'm not discounting that--but they're mostly losing the franchise wars.
That looks like a lot of hyperbole. Sources for: Paramount has no vision, little mindshare, Tranformers is biggest, there's a franchise "war"?
Without word direct from inside, it's more likely that the sources of speculation are forgotten and morph into fan "fact." And there are times where even the people on the inside don't have the answers until they talk things over and then make decisions.
I don't agree with this post. It is possible that Paramount has a vision you don't agree with, but doubtful that they have no vision at all.
What's their vision? Because I see a company which gave the Star Trek movies to Bad Robot (good business decision), but then took 4 years to get the sequel out (not good) then gave the second sequel to a completely novice director and now the movie is in (apparently) complete disarray.
Aside from "turn Star Trek into a summer blockbuster franchise", what's their vision?
Large movie studios "vision" is to make films that are profitable, culturally engaging (not significant - engaging) and popular enough to build a franchise.
What "vision" did you expect them to have?
What "vision" did you expect them to have?
Sorry, I think we're talking at cross-purposes. Of course their vision is money, but look at the way other studios plan their tentpole releases. Hell, Marvel is setting new standards in this in releasing their entire calendar for the next 5 years.
Paramount is treating these blockbusters as they've been treated in the past, as more ad hoc affairs that you can have 4 years between, and that's just a level of planning that isn't going to fly anymore.
Plus, the development hell that ST3 is in right now.
Compare this to Star Wars. We know when Episode VII AND VIII are coming out, and who's directing them.
I get your point TracerBullet, and the only answer I have is that there are obvious reasons why Disney is a monstrous entertainment juggernaut and Paramount is not.
But it's not just Disney. Every film franchise these days is a huge expanded universe, so Paramount dumping out a single standalone Star Trek movie every four years just isn't enough to compete.
