Maybe we'll see a true to the original connie during the shows run. For me that'd be a nice treat.
That seems unlikely. Rumor is that the Federation received it's make-over from the Mass Effect game series because various executives think that series is "has a stronger connection to modern sci-fi audiences than Star Trek". Other rumors state that some of the "powers that be" just like Mass Effect.
I really want to see a "behind the scenes" documentary of this show.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
That seems unlikely. Rumor is that the Federation received it's make-over from the Mass Effect game series because various executives think that series is "has a stronger connection to modern sci-fi audiences than Star Trek". Other rumors state that some of the "powers that be" just like Mass Effect.
I really want to see a "behind the scenes" documentary of this show.
This has nothing to do with "Maff Effect", at least not directly. The show is meant to visually resemble the recent movie trilogy which was financially more succesful than every other movie or show in the history of the franchise. That may be in part due to the visual style fitting into current popular sci-fi works, but for Discovery the reason are the recent original works of Star Trek. Still, they try to skim the surface of the original series ever so often we may catch a glimpse somewhere, be it a graphic, a ship in dry-dock or even a fly-by. I'm pretty sure the name "Enterprise" gets dropped SOMEWHERE throughout the show...
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
This has nothing to do with "Maff Effect", at least not directly. The show is meant to visually resemble the recent movie trilogy which was financially more succesful than every other movie or show in the history of the franchise.
This is not correct. Star Trek (2009) met profit expectations, and greenlit the next two movies. Star Trek: Into Darkness under performed at the box office while Star Trek: Beyond GREATLY under performed, and cost Paramount an estimated 50 million dollars.
The space suits, weapons, ship interiors, even the Shenzu are NOT inspired by the JJ-verse. The trailers have been cut and edited to appear to be from the JJ-verse so that "millienials in line for coffee can look up a trailer on their phone and say 'Yep. That looks like Star Trek'". The show itself will have much less lens flare and fewer "slanted camera" shots typical of the JJ movies.
The appearance of the Federation being Mass Effect inspired is the rumor. I can see the Normandy in the design of the Shenzu, and the interior shots look similar as well. However, it is just a rumor. Which is why I would like to see a documentary.
This is not correct. Star Trek (2009) met profit expectations, and greenlit the next two movies. Star Trek: Into Darkness under performed at the box office while Star Trek: Beyond GREATLY under performed, and cost Paramount an estimated 50 million dollars.
The space suits, weapons, ship interiors, even the Shenzu are NOT inspired by the JJ-verse. The trailers have been cut and edited to appear to be from the JJ-verse so that "millienials in line for coffee can look up a trailer on their phone and say 'Yep. That looks like Star Trek'". The show itself will have much less lens flare and fewer "slanted camera" shots typical of the JJ movies.
The appearance of the Federation being Mass Effect inspired is the rumor. I can see the Normandy in the design of the Shenzu, and the interior shots look similar as well. However, it is just a rumor. Which is why I would like to see a documentary.
In that case I stand corrected, but I can't be bothered to look it up anyway. If true then I am surprised, I was under the assumption the new movies were big successes. If they underperformed, I'm surprised the new show got greenlit at all.
The props used are not directly influenced by the movies, but they fall mostly intot he same aesthetic category. Other props try to emulate the TOS look which is what lets me remain hopeful.
The "Mass Effect" obsession I can't share anyway.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Which is irrelevant, since we are talking about PROFIT not TOTAL EARNINGS. Star Trek: Beyond cost an estimated 200 million dollars in production costs and marketing. It was a LOSS, which is why there is not going to be a 4th movie.
Edit: I mistyped "200" million. The most generous estimates put it at "300" million, with studio expectations putting worldwide sales at 500 million.
If they underperformed, I'm surprised the new show got greenlit at all.
It was greenlit because Netflix paid most of the upfront costs. However, CBS has paid for 3 additional episodes because they have significant faith in the series.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
greenlit, casted and release date set for 2019; of course, a lot can happen in 2 years
paramount may decide to cancel it - but since movies are the only star trek CBS allows them to produce, not making more will be shooting themselves in the foot
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Discovery itself looks like an older version of starfleet design, from before Shenzou. Is it possible Discovery is a reyrofit of an older design?
It certainly doesn't look like a contemporary of the Constitution.
As I wrote elsewhere, it actually has a bridge module reminiscent of the Daedalus which is much older than the connie and it would make sense for her to use that level of technology.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Paramount reported series losses for 2016, Star Trek: Beyond was among them. My assumption was the deficit came from worldwide marketing (which typically rivals the cost of the movie to make, but is rarely made public). I've found estimates from 120 to 180 million, including domestic and worldwide marketing costs. If Star Trek: Beyond did make a profit, it was around 15 million at the most. Considering a budget of 300 million, that is still small potatoes (though not an outright bomb. More of a "fizzle").
Last I heard, the 4th film was greenlit by Paramount?
Paramount cannot afford another bomb. It cannot afford a "fizzle". The Star Trek ip does not have the power to put Paramount back in the black. If Star Trek:Discovery is a success, Paramount might gamble on another JJ-verse outing. Fans of the JJ-verse may have to wait until Paramount makes a few more successful movies before JJ the 4th is made.
You could say this very same thing about any film franchise and/or studio really. I don't doubt we'll see a fourth Star Trek film.
No. Not every studio is in the situation Paramount is in now. Until Paramount is in the black, I doubt you will see another JJ Trek. After Star Trek 2009, there was an expectation for each movie to make 500 mil. Into Darkness came close. Beyond did not. Paramount is currently not in a position to take risks (but that is not Star Trek's fault).
You could say this very same thing about any film franchise and/or studio really. I don't doubt we'll see a fourth Star Trek film.
No. Not every studio is in the situation Paramount is in now. Until Paramount is in the black, I doubt you will see another JJ Trek. After Star Trek 2009, there was an expectation for each movie to make 500 mil. Into Darkness came close. Beyond did not. Paramount is currently not in a position to take risks (but that is not Star Trek's fault).
Star Trek: Beyond is currently sitting at 84% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 80%. Star Trek: Into Darkness is currently sitting at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 90% Star Trek 2009 is currently sitting at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 91%
From the information shown on this site, as well as similar aggregate sites, your opinion does not seem to represent the majority. It is the majority opinion (along with actual sales figures) that influences the movie process. How many Transformers movies are there now?
For what it is worth, I enjoyed Beyond far more than Into Darkness.
Star Trek: Beyond is currently sitting at 84% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 80%. Star Trek: Into Darkness is currently sitting at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 90% Star Trek 2009 is currently sitting at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 91%
From the information shown on this site, as well as similar aggregate sites, your opinion does not seem to represent the majority. It is the majority opinion (along with actual sales figures) that influences the movie process. How many Transformers movies are there now?
For what it is worth, I enjoyed Beyond far more than Into Darkness.
Well, 2009 and Derpness...er, Darkness are 2 I won't bother seeing again.
Plus I am quite please I am not of the majority.
According to whom? Star Trek films never made that kind of money at the box office before. Seems a bit silly to suddenly expect that kind of intake.
Because Paramount needed another blockbuster. BADLY.
If you are saying "Paramount has unrealistic expectations" then you are correct. It was promising investors a result it could not deliver on. It reported a huge loss for 2016 and counted Star Trek: Beyond among the failures (which is why I think the losses were from marketing costs).
On the other side of things, JJ Abrams approached CBS with the idea of a television show set in the JJ-verse. CBS said "No". Many in the industry believe that lower profit and lower opinion of Star Trek: Beyond factored into their decision. There is a real perception in the industry that JJ Abram's Trek is not profitable.
Keep in mind guys, "Hollywood Accounting" is a thing.
And Hollywood accounting often takes into account sales not directly tied to the movie, such as merc and dvds. Theater ticket sales are not the sum total of film revenue.
Comments
I really want to see a "behind the scenes" documentary of this show.
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
This has nothing to do with "Maff Effect", at least not directly. The show is meant to visually resemble the recent movie trilogy which was financially more succesful than every other movie or show in the history of the franchise. That may be in part due to the visual style fitting into current popular sci-fi works, but for Discovery the reason are the recent original works of Star Trek. Still, they try to skim the surface of the original series ever so often we may catch a glimpse somewhere, be it a graphic, a ship in dry-dock or even a fly-by. I'm pretty sure the name "Enterprise" gets dropped SOMEWHERE throughout the show...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The space suits, weapons, ship interiors, even the Shenzu are NOT inspired by the JJ-verse. The trailers have been cut and edited to appear to be from the JJ-verse so that "millienials in line for coffee can look up a trailer on their phone and say 'Yep. That looks like Star Trek'". The show itself will have much less lens flare and fewer "slanted camera" shots typical of the JJ movies.
The appearance of the Federation being Mass Effect inspired is the rumor. I can see the Normandy in the design of the Shenzu, and the interior shots look similar as well. However, it is just a rumor. Which is why I would like to see a documentary.
In that case I stand corrected, but I can't be bothered to look it up anyway. If true then I am surprised, I was under the assumption the new movies were big successes. If they underperformed, I'm surprised the new show got greenlit at all.
The props used are not directly influenced by the movies, but they fall mostly intot he same aesthetic category. Other props try to emulate the TOS look which is what lets me remain hopeful.
The "Mass Effect" obsession I can't share anyway.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Edit: I mistyped "200" million. The most generous estimates put it at "300" million, with studio expectations putting worldwide sales at 500 million.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
It certainly doesn't look like a contemporary of the Constitution.
paramount may decide to cancel it - but since movies are the only star trek CBS allows them to produce, not making more will be shooting themselves in the foot
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
As I wrote elsewhere, it actually has a bridge module reminiscent of the Daedalus which is much older than the connie and it would make sense for her to use that level of technology.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Funny since Beyond was better of the three
Star Trek: Into Darkness is currently sitting at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 90%
Star Trek 2009 is currently sitting at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, with an average audience score of 91%
From the information shown on this site, as well as similar aggregate sites, your opinion does not seem to represent the majority. It is the majority opinion (along with actual sales figures) that influences the movie process. How many Transformers movies are there now?
For what it is worth, I enjoyed Beyond far more than Into Darkness.
Well, 2009 and Derpness...er, Darkness are 2 I won't bother seeing again.
Plus I am quite please I am not of the majority.
If you are saying "Paramount has unrealistic expectations" then you are correct. It was promising investors a result it could not deliver on. It reported a huge loss for 2016 and counted Star Trek: Beyond among the failures (which is why I think the losses were from marketing costs).
On the other side of things, JJ Abrams approached CBS with the idea of a television show set in the JJ-verse. CBS said "No". Many in the industry believe that lower profit and lower opinion of Star Trek: Beyond factored into their decision. There is a real perception in the industry that JJ Abram's Trek is not profitable.
My character Tsin'xing