I think I need a nap I had it right the first time. SHEESH.

“Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan wouldn’t fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first…”

should be:

“Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan would fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first…”

I think Daoud is dancing around the often ephemeral nature of a contract in “Hollywood” (It is often joked, they are not worth the paper that they are written on.) most of which revolve around options with time limits that expire.

For example, while the exact details of Paramount’s license from CBS is unknown, it is certain that if Paramount does not begin production of the next ST by the end of a certain time window that the rights revert to CBS and they are free to license ST to another party. It was well reported that Moonves gave Berman 18 mos. to get 2009’s production started and seems reasonable to expect that the same window holds for the next Trek movie.

Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan wouldn’t fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first (I mean Redstone just had to sell $1 billion worth of Viacom and CBS stock just so he could be certain their parent company could make the mandated payment on on its huge mound of debt.)

Myself, I’m puzzling over whether their decision to release TRANSFORMERS 2 and GI JOE to home video before ST is any hint of how Paramount is juggling its sequel productions – especially given the recent consolidations of its home and movie marketing departments?

Or maybe he could play the young Jim Phelps. ;)

You know who disagrees with you? Every single contract writer ever. Contracts are never pointless. That’s why they’re called C-O-N-T-R-A-C-T-S!

Sheesh. “Contracts are pointless.” Are you high? I mean, honestly.

All the signs are positive, all systems go. They haven’t written a script yet. So what? And if they had cranked one out already we’d probably be seeing paranoia over the quality of a script written so quickly. The deliberation here is actually a positive sign.

They’ve signed for 3 films, yes. However, they are not expected to refuse all work for a 4-6 year period should Star Trek sequels be green-lit at some specified time.

Scheduling conflicts happen all the time. Films get delayed because a big star signed to movie B was filming movie A. Should an actor sign a deal to be in another film, with announcement of Star Trek when production will start in the middle of some other production – there’s a problem. There are usually compromises, with shooting schedules worked around, but stuff happens. Happened on X-Men, has happened on just about any other franchise or sequel.

At any rate I was only throwing out one possibility for the third film. I hold firm that this iteration of the franchise will only see 3 films before the likelihood of future endeavors becoming next to impossible (depending on cast demand, $$$, interest, etc).

And that’s really assuming that Paramount can get its act together in the first place. Look at The Hobbit, setback after setback for one of the biggest movie franchises ever.