Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
JJ already turned Trek into Mission Impossible in space. Besides, it was the general audience Paramount needed to woo.
I still don't understand this attitude. Trek has to evolve along with the rest of the media landscape or else it is going to wither and die. If Bryan Fuller and CBS try to get people to buy into 90's style Trek again, the new show will simply get buried by much better and socially relevant shows.
Paramount's big mistake was trying to woo Trekkies after Into Darkness and the first trailer for Beyond. I know nothing gets me excited like trailers of Kirk moping around the Enterprise because he is bored.
I'm not quite a grandfather yet, but I'm forty-five and been watching Star Trek for as long as I can remember. I've loved the Abrams movies. They are the most fun I've had with Trek since The Undiscovered Country, and is far more in the spirit of the original series than anything produced by the spinoffs.
Not really, as the characters in M:I are cutouts, at best.
I'm with you on this one. I don't get the bemoaning of the trailer, as trailers are rarely right, but apparently it indicated that the movie would suck. Then, it turns out to be good.
As for the 50th anniversary, well, I will lay that at the feet of CBS. If they are happy, then who am I to complain? I got a good movie to enjoy with my dad who introduced me to Star Trek. Feels bring epic to me.
It has more to do with JJ doing MI3 for Paramount, and that getting him the directing job for Trek. He took the MI model and just applied to Trek to make a fast pace, insurmountable odds, team movie in space. JJ being the executive producer for both MI4 and MI5 as well. He had less to do with 5, because he was doing Star Wars at the time. Michael Giacchino even scored the MI movies with JJ.
It was never going to happen. You were just fooling yourself.
Ok. Fair point.
Funny enough, JJ's M:I movie is probably in the running for being the slowest and most serious one. The only one that has a 'darker' tone is the original, and that's probably because it was De Palma doing a spin on various bits he liked from Hitchcock's spy thrillers.
(That's not a slam. I like De Palma...mostly.)
M:I3 is certainly a grittier and more tense watch than his Trek movies. Even if their villains do share a fondness for messily destroying the brains of their victims.
True, but at least Mission Impossible is another '60s Desilu production. Isn't that close enough?
Yeah, like seeing the Kobayashi Maru scene in ST09, or the reactor scene in STID to name just 2 out of several. Were these scenes 'never going to happen' either?
Both of those were reinterpretations of classic scenes. That's rather different than expecting to see the exact same design that was used in a film 30 years ago.
I never said I wanted the exact same design. Just a reinterpretation of it from this team, like the uniforms strongly resembling the 60's ones (especially in the first two films). I don't believe this design is that. I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it.
Legend of Tarzan was widely expected to be a flop prior to coming out (after all, who really wanted this movie?). It didn't have any big names and was based on a character that has had numerous movies already (with varied performances) at the box office. The best performing Tarzan movie was a Disney cartoon version. That being said, it definitely over-performed expectations. There were some people that didn't think this movie would make $50 million domestic ($125 million). It was not a flop but having such a large budget will limit it's ability to be considered a box office hit. It has a good chance of ending up in the black before all is said and done.
TrekMovie has a new article about Star Trek Beyond's lukewarm performance at the box office.
It all comes out to this:
Production Budget: $185,000,000
Marketing Budget: $120,000,000
Total Gross: $336,756,543 (so far)
"Is Beyond is in the Red? Most Likely"
"Beyond had a budget of $185 million, with an additional $120 million spent on marketing the film. That alone would bring the money spent on production and marketing to $305 million. With an estimated final haul of just over $346 million, it would seem that Beyond is $41 million in the black."
"Hollywood earnings in China can vary between $0.25 to $0.50 on the dollar. Based on Beyond’s $65.8 million Chinese haul, the amount Paramount takes home may vary from $16.4 to $32.9 million, enough to nearly erase Beyond’s perceived profitability. Many other countries, including Russia, operate the same way to protect their local film industries. The point to take home is that the total international earnings for a film do not represent what Paramount actually receives."
"When Paramount partners with a company like Skydance Media (formerly Skydance Productions), Paramount is accepting a percentage of the production and marketing budget from a company that exists to finance film and television. Skydance, and similar companies, raise funds and partner with the big studios to co-produce and co-finance productions. However, that money is not a free loan. Paramount will owe Skydance interest on what the company advanced, in addition to any money owed in a profit-sharing agreement that it almost certainly written into Skydance’s contract with Paramount."
"In addition to Skydance, IMDbPro indicates that Paramount had six additional partners in producing Beyond: Hong Kong’s Alibaba Pictures Group, China’s Huahua Media & Culture, and Bad Robot, Sneaky Shark, and Perfect Storm Entertainment in the United States. Additionally, Paramount had eight partners helping to distribute the film internationally."
"All of these companies are likely involved in a profit-share agreement with Paramount, and will be owed money."
It all comes out to this:
Production Budget: $185,000,000
Marketing Budget: $120,000,000
Total Gross: $336,756,543 (so far)
"Is Beyond is in the Red? Most Likely"
"Beyond had a budget of $185 million, with an additional $120 million spent on marketing the film. That alone would bring the money spent on production and marketing to $305 million. With an estimated final haul of just over $346 million, it would seem that Beyond is $41 million in the black."
"Hollywood earnings in China can vary between $0.25 to $0.50 on the dollar. Based on Beyond’s $65.8 million Chinese haul, the amount Paramount takes home may vary from $16.4 to $32.9 million, enough to nearly erase Beyond’s perceived profitability. Many other countries, including Russia, operate the same way to protect their local film industries. The point to take home is that the total international earnings for a film do not represent what Paramount actually receives."
"When Paramount partners with a company like Skydance Media (formerly Skydance Productions), Paramount is accepting a percentage of the production and marketing budget from a company that exists to finance film and television. Skydance, and similar companies, raise funds and partner with the big studios to co-produce and co-finance productions. However, that money is not a free loan. Paramount will owe Skydance interest on what the company advanced, in addition to any money owed in a profit-sharing agreement that it almost certainly written into Skydance’s contract with Paramount."
"In addition to Skydance, IMDbPro indicates that Paramount had six additional partners in producing Beyond: Hong Kong’s Alibaba Pictures Group, China’s Huahua Media & Culture, and Bad Robot, Sneaky Shark, and Perfect Storm Entertainment in the United States. Additionally, Paramount had eight partners helping to distribute the film internationally."
"All of these companies are likely involved in a profit-share agreement with Paramount, and will be owed money."
Other than children, I think people are just tired of generic big budget action movies.I guess the box office shows that the public's love affair with Star Trek is over.
But you just said that Trek has to evolve (which I agree with). The Abram's movies are retro. They're backward looking not forward looking.
Growth means changing with the times, making things that modern audiences are going to be interested in. Not moving forward in a fictional timeline.
I'm not talking about the timeline. The JJ movies are retro.
They really aren't. They are modern films, made in a modern style. If they were retro, why would some folks be bitching about them not being "Star Trek"?
As I believe you have pointed out many times, the majority of "Star Trek Fans" like the new films.
These are absolutely retro films, but granted with a modern production style, the modern style being face paced action, and updated look and massive amounts of special FX. That's not evolution though. That's just making these movies like all their generic contemporaries.
Similar threads
