RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,656
Posts: 5,428,793
Members: 24,812
Currently online: 578
Newest member: JamesTKolkSB118


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 21 2013, 04:56 PM   #2326
khan2
Ensign
 
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

<khan mode off>
My apologies, I have been following news coverage of the protests and hope that they will lead to meaningful reforms for the people of Brazil.
</khan mode on>
khan2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 06:58 PM   #2327
ralph
Captain
 
ralph's Avatar
 
Location: Brazil
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

BillJ wrote: View Post
khan2 wrote: View Post
Yeah, guess that's why Hangover III is making more in its 3rd week of Brazilian release than STID is in its first week even though STID is showing in 10% more theaters than Hangover III. If only things were more calm and peaceful.
Wow.

Hope you're staying safe, ralph and things settle down quickly.
Cities are calm. The protests are against government agencies. The protest was against corruption and the recent scandals Involving allegations of embezzling public money with FIFA World Cup in Brazil. Previous governments used the policy of bread and circuses to make people feel happy, without protest. But today there is a different thought. Soccer is the national passion but it's not the most important thing to brazillian.
__________________
Ralph Pinheiro
ralph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 08:06 PM   #2328
Cyrus
Rear Admiral
 
Cyrus's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

For those dudes who are fascinated by the adjusted for inflation boxoffice numbers, it has now passed Wrath of Khan:

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/...d=startrek.htm
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 08:18 PM   #2329
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 08:37 PM   #2330
Out Of My Vulcan Mind
Vice Admiral
 
Out Of My Vulcan Mind's Avatar
 
Location: Wherever you go, there you are.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Thursday number: $522,864 for $213,610,916 so far. Box office was hampered on Thursday across the board because of the big NBA game. Friday increases should be bigger than usual as things return to normal.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 08:45 PM   #2331
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Cyrus wrote: View Post
For those dudes who are fascinated by the adjusted for inflation boxoffice numbers, it has now passed Wrath of Khan:

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/...d=startrek.htm

Do you have the sense that I do, that doing the "adjusted numbers" thing in comparing box office is basically bullshit? By that I mean it misleads into the notion that we're then comparing apples to apples, but that's premised on the ridiculous proposition that all other variables are somehow equal or can be made equal.

IMAO there's actually no reasonable way to compare either the economic decisions or the taste of someone in, say, 1939 deciding to spend some change on The Wizard Of Oz to someone deciding in 2009 to drop twenty dollars to see Avatar in IMAX. It's always apples-to-oranges.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 08:55 PM   #2332
The Keeper
Commodore
 
The Keeper's Avatar
 
Location: Where reality ends and illusion begins
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Out Of My Vulcan Mind wrote: View Post
Thursday number: $522,864 for $213,610,916 so far. Box office was hampered on Thursday across the board because of the big NBA game. Friday increases should be bigger than usual as things return to normal.
Oh, my money is part of those numbers!

I snuck off yesterday and caught an afternoon screening. About 25 people total in a 1:40pm showing.
The Keeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 09:40 PM   #2333
Cyrus
Rear Admiral
 
Cyrus's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Cyrus wrote: View Post
For those dudes who are fascinated by the adjusted for inflation boxoffice numbers, it has now passed Wrath of Khan:

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/...d=startrek.htm

Do you have the sense that I do, that doing the "adjusted numbers" thing in comparing box office is basically bullshit? By that I mean it misleads into the notion that we're then comparing apples to apples, but that's premised on the ridiculous proposition that all other variables are somehow equal or can be made equal.

IMAO there's actually no reasonable way to compare either the economic decisions or the taste of someone in, say, 1939 deciding to spend some change on The Wizard Of Oz to someone deciding in 2009 to drop twenty dollars to see Avatar in IMAX. It's always apples-to-oranges.
Yeah, I agree completely. There is no way to make apple-to-apple comparisons of movies from different eras, way too many variables. The best we can do is to say that both STID & TWOK were hit movies in the years they were released (e.g. in the top 10 movies of the year), but any direct comparison of boxoffice numbers (adjusted or not) is not that meaningful.

Would Gone With the Wind make $1.6 billion domestically if it was released today? It wouldn't even come close. But it made a lot of money when it was released, which was at a time that not only it didn't have too much movie competition or any home video competition, it didn't have any TV competition at all. Also as you say the taste of the moviegoers from different generations will not be the same.
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 09:48 PM   #2334
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Do you have the sense that I do, that doing the "adjusted numbers" thing in comparing box office is basically bullshit? .

The studios don't like it all. Who can blame them? If you look at adjusted grosses, you would think no one has made a legitimate blockbuster since Gone With The Wind.
__________________
"What went wrong!? All my sockpuppets loved this movie!" - Kevin Smith
thumbtack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 10:08 PM   #2335
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Do you have the sense that I do, that doing the "adjusted numbers" thing in comparing box office is basically bullshit?
They are all BS, actually. Non-adjusted, adjusted, attendance. But it's hard for people today to get a grasp of how much money a movie made in 1937 if they don't have a solid appreciation of how much dollars were worth back then, hence the adjustment.

I think it's at least an interesting approximation. Personally I'd prefer attendance (# of tickets sold).
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 10:11 PM   #2336
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

# of tickets doesn't work. The price of a movie in the 30s through the 50s was a nickel.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21 2013, 11:38 PM   #2337
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Opus wrote: View Post
# of tickets doesn't work. The price of a movie in the 30s through the 50s was a nickel.
So ? A nickel was much more expensive than now.

I want to know how many times it was seen in theatres. I realise it's not a perfect metric, and adjusted gross is the next best thing... and is itself not perfect. As Buzzkill and I both said, there's no way to really compare them, in addition to the fact that audiences and culture were different back then.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 04:49 AM   #2338
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Opus wrote: View Post
# of tickets doesn't work. The price of a movie in the 30s through the 50s was a nickel.
Yeah, but my opinion is that nothing really works so we ought to give that shit up.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 06:52 AM   #2339
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Opus wrote: View Post
# of tickets doesn't work. The price of a movie in the 30s through the 50s was a nickel.
Yeah, but my opinion is that nothing really works so we ought to give that shit up.
Well, if we give that shit up, and if any measure we have to apply is apples-to-oranges, then we can't use any measure to defend a claim about what's the most successful film in history. Certainly, biggest nominal gross to date doesn't mean most successful in history.

I don't think we should give anything up. That's just throwing in the towel. Certainly, the more measures one considers, the more complete a picture one has, although some measures obviously don't bring very much to the table. However, whether considering them is bullshit really depends on what conclusion one is trying to infer, or what claim one is trying to make.

Cyrus wrote: View Post
Would Gone With the Wind make $1.6 billion domestically if it was released today?
That's actually even less meaningful than it sounds, because you'd have to imagine a world in which it had never existed at all until now, which is pretty much impossible.

However, if the domestic box office of GWTW were hypothetically invested in inflation-indexed bonds and managed appropriately, then one could have something like $1.6 billion dollars today. That actually sounds well on the way to being a meaningful statement, to me, pending actual numbers.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:46 AM   #2340
Beyerstein
Captain
 
Beyerstein's Avatar
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

How would number of tickets sold not be the best way to measure the popularity of movies during their theatrical runs?
Beyerstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.