^ As the article observes, even if you liked the movie, what was there to market? Yet another generic revenge-obsessed digitally voice-lowered baddie? The worst action editing in the franchise to date? The fiftieth anniversary of the franchise, which the target audience doesn't give a darn about? Kirk feeling old and bored? Uhura having nothing to do?
2009's
Star Trek: The Star Trek did pretty well at the domestic box office and got great reviews, but I think that was largely a fluke -
Star Wars was still ostensibly not coming back,
Guardians was not yet a thing, and the general public's brand name recognition of Kirk and Spock had largely been untapped for fifteen years. Instead of seeing that for what it was, however - a lucky once-in-a-generation moment - Paramount thought they had a new(ish) major franchise on their hands, and they've been chasing that mythical dragon ever since.
Beyond may not have flopped hard, but now that
Stars Wars is very much back and
Guardians is still kicking,
Trek definitely doesn't own big-screen space adventure the way it did seven years ago.
Despite the cinematic food poisoning of this latest movie, I'd still like to see this cast attempt an actual sci-fi story, maybe even with (gasp!) some depth or contemporary resonance, but if Paramount thinks they can make gobs of money by reheating the same old evil space aliens taking
reveeeennnnngggeee!!! crap, well, I have a $200m-budget
Ghostbusters: Answer the Call 2 to sell them.