And to think that they could've spent the same amount on about seven seasons of a new Star Trek tv series.
Would a new series have been a better gamble than a new movie? Doubtful. The ratings for new ST have been on a downward slide since DS9.
The general public only have to commit to a two-hour movie, and may become new (or revived) ST fans as a result. That's a much easier sell than seven years of a TV show, not to mention the fear that low ratings might cut it short, as they did ENT.
The studio would also be able to tell if they've got a hit or turkey on their hands long before they hit the $150 million mark, as well as make any corrections that might be needed to straighten things out and improve their chances of making back their investment.
A one season flop? They might be out $50 million in production and development costs, and that's gonna be mitigated by the sponsor and station money that's gonna be there regardless.
A flop of a movie? Like the old formula goes, if you don't make back at least twice your budget, it's a flop, and the bigger your budget, obviously, the bigger the hole you have to dig yourself out of. And $150 million is one helluva deep hole.