StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Does anyone else feel a little worried or concerned about how, since the trailer came out on Youtube, there's been almost zero marketing for Star Trek: Beyond? The July 22 release date is now less than 3 months away and it's practically radio silence coming from Paramount.

My other concern about the trailer is it of course pretty much gives away the whole movie. The Enterprise is blown up, the crew is captured except for the main characters, they meet a useful alien lady, and they have to fight the scaly faced alien dude to get out of the situation.

StarArmy wrote:Does anyone else feel a little worried or concerned about how, since the trailer came out on Youtube, there's been almost zero marketing for Star Trek: Beyond? The July 22 release date is now less than 3 months away and it's practically radio silence coming from Paramount.

My other concern about the trailer is it of course pretty much gives away the whole movie. The Enterprise is blown up, the crew is captured except for the main characters, they meet a useful alien lady, and they have to fight the scaly faced alien dude to get out of the situation.

This is striking me as a relatively cheap stopgap to make it look like Paramount is doing 'something' for the 50th anniversary of the franchise. I agree, I've seen next to nothing concerning the release of the movie. I'm thinking if this does middling numbers like the last 2, Paramount is gonna put it back on ice for god knows how long again.

"middling numbers"?

The last two were the biggest star trek films in history - each one took more than the rest of the TOS and TNG movie franchise put together.

Well ok maybe not. But still, the highest return they ever got was ST1 and ST4 - 140 and 130m respectively. STFC took in 150m.

ST09 took in 385m and STID took in 466m.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franc ... ab=summary


It's not Avengers level - Trek never will be. But just because a film doesn't make 1 billion dollars doesn't make it middling.

They may *want* $1bn+ out of it, but that wont happen. Trek doesn't have that appeal at the movies. Never has and never will.




As to ST:B -- until I heard about the trailer here, I didn't even know it was released. I've seen no marketing on it, in fact I'm not even vaguely aware of it unless someone mentions it. There's no hype.

I don't blame them in the early part of the year - all the marketing would be swallowed up by Star Wars. But they really need to be pushing it now, it's like they've decided it's a flop before it starts.

I wont be watching it at the cinema anyway - that trailer is abysmal. I have never seen something less like Star Trek before lol. Motorbikes, rock music / heavy metal screaming etc.

Is that without inflation? Because that tends to rather bias results. It's just like with the original Star Wars vs The Avengers or Avatar. When you adjust for inflation Gone with the Wind is still the highest grossing movie in history.

Adjusting for inflation, Star Trek '09 is still the top-grossing film in the franchise. Only ahead of TMP by about $10m, but then the latter was released before home video was really a widespread thing. STID is the fourth-highest grossing, after ST09, TMP and TVH. (link)

And if you want any illustration of just how epic a failure Nemesis was, adjusting for inflation it made barely half of what the next lowest-grossing Trek film (TFF) did.

The heck? That ship at the end looks distinctly NX-y.

Maybe it's an old ship that was kept on that planet. We know from the models in Admiral MArcus' office that the NX class were around in this new timeline.

Hell, maybe it is the NX-01 that they borrow to escape. I really hope not as that would be painfuly cliched, but yeah.

It's the USS Franklin, a very small ship.




The two trailers make the film look very different. No idea why they released the original teaser like that.

The second trailer does make the film look a lot better. Still not holding out hope though.

I don't know what you're basing that on, but it would be a deep mistake to judge this film on the preceding Abrams films (though I don't think they're as bad as a lot of bitter Trekkies claim). No Abrams, different writers, apparently more of an emphasis on the frontier and on humour.

And the first trailer was evidently... just a shit trailer. Didn't Simon Pegg even say something about how, basically, it wasn't an accurate depiction of the film?

Seeing the Enterprise destroyed in the trailer just makes me want to not watch it already.

I don't know if the aliens on the planet are the same that attacked the Enterprise, but if they are, then it annoys me that they have aliens that are advanced enough to launch a swarm of ships while simultaneously appearing to be primitively tribal.

A certain level of technology does not necessarily equate to a culture we would consider "modern" or "progressive", obviously.

Is Earth being threatened again?

What is wrong with lowering the stakes here? This is the same thing that made The Force Awakens worse*, they needed a major threat or there was a sense things are smaller in scale. Do they forget that that the most widely respected Trek and Wars films both had relatively small character drive stakes(TWOK and TESB)?

* Nearly all of the problems in that movie for me revolved around Starkiller Base. Had it been exactly the same story without that, it would have been better, in that it would have felt like a genuinely different story even if it was otherwise a retread of ANH. The final battle could have been about acquiring the last section of the map, as well as rescuing Rey as a bonus.

biostem wrote:I don't know if the aliens on the planet are the same that attacked the Enterprise, but if they are, then it annoys me that they have aliens that are advanced enough to launch a swarm of ships while simultaneously appearing to be primitively tribal.

TOS would never have a machine AI god creature looking after a primitive race...