Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser
Suprising. I've seen the movie twice, and enjoyed it both times. What held this movie back in your opinion, Dane? Is this Abrams losing his appeal, or was the movie just a lot worse than I thought it was?
|
I don't think it was any one singular factor but multiple factors. Four years between movies was a real detriment to the franchise. The original reboot, even with a lackluster story and mediocre villain, brought life back to an all but dead franchise. Paramount should have fast tracked a sequel to be in theaters no more than 24 months after the original. That wait really killed any momentum they gained with reboot.
Also, as previously discussed, the domestic marketing was horrid. Paramount should have had
Star Trek blazing constantly on Showtime, Spike, FX and even on CBS (like a Sunday Night movie of the week) for months in advance. Instead, they did nothing.
Also, the whole "Is he or isn't he" Khan thing really worked against them. If they would have just come out said "Yes, it's Khan!", then they could have had a different marketing strategy, which would have included better trailers, posters, etc. When it finally became known to audiences, most people were like "meh".
Finally, I think that intelligent audiences have cooled on Abrams and especially, Lindelof. The
Lost debacle was bad enough (with even George R.R. Martin chiming in at one point saying he didn't want to pull a "Lost" and **** up the ending of GoT) but
Prometheus was just a killer.
Couple that with the word getting out rather quickly that this film was more of a rehash than something new a fresh (alternate timeline, hello?) and it was just too many factors for it to overcome.