• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The more I read about this film...

Yeah, but if you don't number your movies, you'll have another Legend of Boggy Creek fiasco. We wouldn't want 2 Star Trek: IIs, would we?
 
Legend of what now?

A series of no-budget, independent films about scientists hunting for a Bigfoot-like creature in the South--one of which was featured in the tenth season of MST2K--where the second film had no number and the third film was labeled as the second.
 
I agree in principle with what you said in the above post...

...but there WAS at least one other case of TOS referencing an earlier episode besides Harry Mudd: The Organian Peace Treaty was mentioned in Tribbles, which I'm sure was a reference to the Organian people from Errand of Mercy.

actually the peace treaty or some aspect of it gets mentioned in the klingon episodes except as far as can remember day of the doy.

it plays a big role in fridays child.
 
However, Paramount is including the costs of development of the unfinished Phase II TV series. Much of the TV series elements were not used for the film itself. Only $26 million was spent on the film itself. Most sources place the film's budget at $35 million when including the cost of the usable elements of Phase II.
So if we do the math, The Motion Picture profit was $ 104 million versus The Wrath of Khan $ 86 million. If we adjust those numbers for predicted 2008 inflation then the profit for The Motion Picture is $ 298 million against The Wrath of Khan $ 207 million. Bottom line is The Motion Picture is the most profitable Trek film ever.
Well, sorta, but not exactly.

First, I've read that it wasn't just Phase II's costs that were factored into TMP's budget, it was all the costs Paramount had incurred trying to restart Star Trek, which would have included paying for Roddenberry's unproduced screenplays, and the pre-production on the aborted "The Planet of the Titans" film.

And you can't calculate the profitability of a film by the box office numbers against the budget. First, there's the marketing overhead. Then there's usually interest to pay on the budget, which means the longer the film takes to make money, the more money it has to make. Furthermore, the theaters keep part of every box office dollar, ergo, a movie that costs $44 million dollars may have to make over $90 million box office to actually recoup the full costs of production and distribution.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top