Quote:
Originally Posted by trackercowe
I think the series might be dead in the water though, unless they can find a way to produce a cheaper movie. Star Trek just doesn't have the same fanbase as Star Wars, Marvel, DC, or even franchises like Hunger Games, Harry Potter, and Pirates.
Both new Star Trek movies were promoted heavily and had massive budgets. They also brought in one of the "hottest" actors at the moment to play the only villain in the Star Trek universe everyone generally knows. Sure people know who the Klingons and Borg are, but not enough to care about them. They obviously believed they needed to use Khan's name to do well at the box office, but even that didn't work.
Paramount and Abrams did all they could to make Star Trek a success imo, and yet Into Darkness made less domestically than the first one, and was only the 14th highest grossing movie of the year. The problem is that young people today just don't care about Star Trek. It's generally for an older crowd, who was there for the television series. It's pretty much a stagnated franchise at this point; I am sure there will be more movies eventually, but I foresee massive changes for the series.
|
I don't really agree with this.
A really good comparable would be the James Bond series in recent years. A basically dead, yet long running film franchise rejuvenated by a good, critically, and commercially well received reboot(Casino Royale, Trek '09). Most people thought the follow up to each would be huge hits, but they actually under performed against expectations due to just not being very good movies (Quantum of Solace, Into Darkness).
Now it'll be up to Paramount to see if they can leverage Trek's fiftieth anniversary and make a really good film that will become a huge hit,,like Sony did with James Bond's fiftieth and Skyfall. The quality of the movie dictates whether it'll be a hit.