What IS at stake?

[Admiral Buzzkill]

i honestly dont think there is a public desire for more star trek. i dont think the general public misses it.

Agreed.

 

[Vigilance]

Trek is a cash cow, a cow that produces money when milked.

Ten years ago. Welcome to now.

No, it's a cash cow right now.

Let's see: multiple comics, toys, collectibles, novels, video games and big budget feature film.

That's now.

How is that not a cash cow?

Which is why this movie is being made, and why Berman was on crack with his "lie fallow for 10 years" concept.

The movies are the tentpole, the thing that props up the entire machine and makes it more profitable. A good movie increases ratings on reruns, book sales, video game sales etc.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Let's see: multiple comics, toys, collectibles, novels, video games

All of which require no investment from the studio - the licenses are sources of profit, pure and simple.

"One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong..."

and big budget feature film.

And that's the one. A big budget film is a huge investment of money and resources and a risk for the studio - it doesn't make Trek "a cash cow" unless it succeeds to a degree that no Trek project has succeeded in over a decade.

Which is what we're debating and wondering about now.

The last decade of Trek has consisted of shows and movies that underperformed and disappointed the studio to the extent that they closed Trek down, fired everyone including folks who'd been on staff for nearly twenty years and sold all the costumes, sets and paraphenalia at auction because they had better use for the space.

That's how it's not a "cash cow" now.

 

[btflash]

Don't you guys have lives instead of flaming this movie day in and day out??

uhhhhhhhhhh, no!

 

[DaveyNY]

Let's see: multiple comics, toys, collectibles, novels, video games

All of which require no investment from the studio - the licenses are sources of profit, pure and simple.

Then why do They have large Licensing Dept's. which spend gobs of money on making sure that the product's listed above are pretty accurate?

"One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong..."

...and big budget feature film.

And that's the one. A big budget film is a huge investment of money and resources and a risk for the studio - it doesn't make Trek "a cash cow" unless it succeeds to a degree that no Trek project has succeeded in over a decade.

Which is what we're debating and wondering about now.

The last decade of Trek has consisted of shows and movies that underperformed and disappointed the studio to the extent that they closed Trek down, fired everyone including folks who'd been on staff for nearly twenty years and sold all the costumes, sets and paraphenalia at auction because they had better use for the space.

That's how it's not a "cash cow" now.

So just by JJ coming along and saying He wants to spend millions on a Trek Movie TPTB said yes?
There was no thought given at all to the fact that Star Trek didn't do well on it's last few outtings??

Or was it that it's the biggest "cash-cow" (Hell, the ONLY "cash-cow") They've got compared to Star Wars??

 

[trekkerguy]

Less films and more, better video games says I!

YES, although that will never happen.

Well, amazingly I have Star Trek Conquest for the Wii on my shelf (I am still amazed). It's not the greatest Trek game, but it is Trek and it did appear on a home console and that was before there was a lot of buzz about the new film. So I'm hopeful!

Star Trek Legacy for Xbox 360 and PC is a very good Trek outing, very real feel to Trek combat. Looking forward to a sequel.

And don't forget about Star Trek Online!

 

[-Brett-]

YES, although that will never happen.

Well, amazingly I have Star Trek Conquest for the Wii on my shelf (I am still amazed). It's not the greatest Trek game, but it is Trek and it did appear on a home console and that was before there was a lot of buzz about the new film. So I'm hopeful!

Star Trek Legacy for Xbox 360 and PC is a very good Trek outing, very real feel to Trek combat. Looking forward to a sequel.

You must be the only person on the planet to think so.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

So just by JJ coming along and saying He wants to spend millions on a Trek Movie TPTB said yes?
There was no thought given at all to the fact that Star Trek didn't do well on it's last few outtings??

Or was it that it's the biggest "cash-cow" (Hell, the ONLY "cash-cow") They've got compared to Star Wars??

I'm sure they gave a ton of thought to how Trek hasnt' done well for nearly a decade. But it's a gamble worth taking. The payoff can be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Everyone thought Batman was dead on the big screen too until a clever director got involved...

But you've got a point in that Paramount doesn't own much in the line of franchises. As far as I know, they've got Trek and they're got Indiana Jones (if there's somethign else, someone thorw it out there), which they are apparently hoping to spin off to keep it alive since Ford is decrepit and no long action hero material. It's a long shot that Indiana Jones can keep going without Ford, though it may work, so they've got a lot of eggs in the Trek basket. New franchises are hard to come by, which is why everyone keeps flogging their old ones.

 

[seigezunt]

Yea with the huge budget for this movie if it bombs then I think Trek will be retired for a LONG time. They may try a reboot again in 10-15 years but I would not expect anything for of least a decade.

Respectfully-

Not a chance in heck of that happening.

Remember when Enterprise went off the air? Berman was saying the franchise "needed a break" and named a 10 year window or so for the fields to lie fallow.

More savvy folks, like Ron Moore, predicted it would be WAY sooner, that someone with juice would make a pitch the studio liked and Paramount would take it.

In fact, it was right around the time the last Enterprise DVD boxed sets came out that the next wave (TOS Remastered and Trek XI) moved forward.

Trek is a cash cow, a cow that produces money when milked.

Money-making franchises are every studio's DREAM. They are all trying to CREATE franchises.

Studios are not in the business of abandoning billion-dollar properties.

If this movie fails, someone else will make a pitch in 2-3 and we will see the results of that in no less than 5 years.

In short, what's at stake is more big budget Trek with TOS actors directed by Abrams.

If this doesn't work, the studio will go another direction. But they will not abandon the franchise for 5 years, much less 10 or 15.

on the nose.

At some point they will just CGI the original actors. When it's cheap enough, and cheaper than real people.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

So just by JJ coming along and saying He wants to spend millions on a Trek Movie TPTB said yes?

Well, they asked him, not the other way around. They're very high on Abrams - reasonably so, IMAO - and you can bet that they wouldn't have been willing to spend 150 million dollars on this film if they weren't confident that he was going to bring a level of appeal to it that Trek never has possessed at its most successful.

Remember that even when Trek was tooling along as a dependably profitable movie franchise in the mid 1980s the studio low-balled the budgets. The budgeting and positioning of this film is only barely based upon the previous performance of Trek at the theaters, either good or bad. It's based on Abrams and the belief that he can turn Trek into a real megahit and modern "tentpole" franchise.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I swear I see this thread, or atleast ones like it, every damn week.

Yeah..I get a pretty good residual check from it...wink wink..

Rob

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I'm thinking more along the lines of cel animation.

Cel animation is actually quite expensive to do. An animated project wouldn't be much of a budget saver.

 

[Siwilliams]

Sci fi should bring Enterprise back for 3 or 4 seasons, 2 episodes away from 100? what the hell

 

[darkwing_duck1]

The budgeting and positioning of this film is only barely based upon the previous performance of Trek at the theaters, either good or bad. It's based on Abrams and the belief that he can turn Trek into a real megahit and modern "tentpole" franchise.

Which, if your prior statements about Trek and it's relative popularity are true, is quite the gamble, wouldn't you say?

Am I correct that you feel Paramount is looking at this LESS as a "Trek" film, and more as a "JJ Abrams" film with the name Trek added on?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, I'll bet that if Abrams had passed on actually directing it the budget would have been less.

 

[Rii]

Personally, not much. Trek is over for me, I enjoyed TOS, TNG, DS9, but I've no desire to revisit them, or to see more Trek in that vein. The upcoming film is something that could potentially revive my interest in the franchise, or not. If it succeeds, that's great, if it doesn't, life will continue sans Trek, as it has for quite some time already.

 

[Ward Fowler]

Nothing less than the future of mankind.

 

[trekkerguy]

Well, amazingly I have Star Trek Conquest for the Wii on my shelf (I am still amazed). It's not the greatest Trek game, but it is Trek and it did appear on a home console and that was before there was a lot of buzz about the new film. So I'm hopeful!

Star Trek Legacy for Xbox 360 and PC is a very good Trek outing, very real feel to Trek combat. Looking forward to a sequel.

You must be the only person on the planet to think so.

I really don't care, I don't enjoy something just because others do.

There were a few minor glitches but otherwise I didn't see anything wrong with the game.

 

[SalvorHardin]

I hear that if the movie flops, there are armies of Apes ready to unleash their fury and take over the planet...

 

[Falcor5]

Nothing less than the future of mankind.