Pegg talks more about beyond and the rumors about Tarantino.
http://www.geekexchange.com/news/simon-pegg-on-star-trek-beyond-those-quentin-tarantino-rumors/
“I think it was poorly marketed, to be honest,” he offers an explanation that probably goes a long way when one considers that none of the trailers mentioned Star Trek‘s 50th Anniversary, and that the use of the Beastie Boys’ “Sabotage” as the backdrop of the first trailer — which heralded all action, and little character — was an instant turn-off. “If you look at a film like Suicide Squad, that was around for such a long time before it finally came out and people were so aware of it. Whereas with Star Trek Beyond, it was left too late before they started their marketing push. It still did great business, but it was disappointing compared to Into Darkness.” Based on the formula of a film grossing twice its production budget to break even, its $343 million gross against its $185 budget didn’t fare well at all for the future.
He has a point but blaming beyond's failure on bad promotion
only is lame and reductive, and not taking responsibility for your story maybe not being what a lot of reboot fans and general audience had expected to see. It isn't taking responsibility over the fact that good reviews still didn't make a lot of the audience want to watch it enough, and even those who watched it and liked it aren't buying the dvds and digital copies like they did for the first two. Even a good review can deliver the opposite result and, paradoxically, create bad promotion sometimes because what some fans were liking about the movie might not necessarily coincide with what other fans and general audience wants to see or finds interesting and exciting. In fact, I'm an example of that because a lot of the stuff I read in some early reviews that were positive for those fans were actually discouraging and boring to me.
Promotion was bad but honestly, I dunno what those guys were supposed to do more than they did. For the most part, they still promoted the movie exactly for what it was and, frankly, Pegg&co didn't give them enough exciting material to use, to begin with. Their interviews too were lacking in a lot of aspects, too repetitive and fan pandering.. Lin especially, as the director, was boring and seemed uninterested. He was a departure, for me, from JJ's commentaries and his charisma.
Maybe Pegg thinks he did good promotion by constantly hinting that the movie was, essentially, made to placate tos fans with nostalgia, ignored stid and went backwards about some aspects that defined JJ's trek so far (the dynamics, certain plot elements they didn't continue or use like many expected) ..but maybe it actually backfired.
I guess they will never get it and it's a problem for me because if you blame it all on promotion only, and don't even TRY to think about which aspects of your movies maybe didn't work, and thus what could be improved the next time, there is no hope then. At least JJ is critical and he admits what were the weak things of his movies.
They just really need to understand that a lot of people liked JJ's movies and if you make a continuation it's OK to try to get new people on board, but it isn't so wise to alienate those who are fans of this trek since 2009 and had some reasonable expectations based on what JJ had created first. You can't replicate the success of JJ's movies by ignoring the very audience that made them successful. This will likely be still valid if they do more movies.
As for the rest, some sites assume that the script he mentions they had ( before Tarantino's rumors) was written by him and Jung, but he didn't say that and he most likely, in fact, is referring to the script that included George Kirk and that JJ was talking about before beyond's release; the story written by the writers who originally worked with Orci on trek 3. Him and Jung never worked on a fourth movie script, at least that's what Jung said some time ago.
