STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by RAMA, Apr 26, 2013.

  1. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    So, after four weeks STID is already only 9 million shy of ST's total worldwide lifetime gross.
    It already made 50 million more in non US-markets after those four weeks than ST made in its entire run.

    ST went on to make another 50 million after four weeks in distribution in the US.

    Yeah, STID surely is a "disappointment". :guffaw:
     
  2. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Usually Americans.
     
  3. Phily B

    Phily B Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I feel like people saying "it's not Star Trek" have an idealised version, instead of an actual version that the rest of us watched.
     
  4. Flake

    Flake Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    The action and destruction in this movie helped it to do much better overseas. I think the action will be the same in the next one as it was in STID, perhaps more. I thought the action was fine in this movie as it was not gratuitous, it simply helped to move on the story.
     
  5. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Yes, it's a financial disappointment for Paramount. You're looking at revenues, not profits.

    It's not going to be anymore profitable then the last Trek film.

    I think Paramount was hoping to turn Star Trek into one of those big time summer mega hits. That's why they spent nearly 200M on it's production.

    That's the kind of budget that gets spent on movies like Iron Man, Transformers ect. But STID isn't going to be anywhere near as profitable as those types films.
     
  6. thumbtack

    thumbtack Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Ankh-Morpork

    It's not that so much as trying to keep your attention away from the foreign grosses.
     
  7. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    No.
     
  8. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Are you referring to my post?

    Did you read all of it? I was factoring in the world wide box office numbers.

    It's not pulling in the type of money worldwide that you want from a film with a 200M budget and a summer time release. I think Paramount was hoping for more.
     
  9. LOKAI of CHERON

    LOKAI of CHERON Commodore Commodore

    There will be a third Bad Robot Trek - the haters will simply have to deal with it.
     
  10. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    This.
     
  11. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Yep. Paramount is disappointed with the domestic gross but happy that their strategy for building Trek up in the international market is working so well.

    The bottom line is this: another Trek movie in three years, written and produced by Bad Robot in the successful style of their last two Trek movies. Will the budget come down a bit? Maybe so.
     
  12. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    So what you are saying is that due to the increased budget for STID it'll end up about as profitable as ST(2009). Couldn't that indicate that they managed to grow the audiance in certain markets? How is that a bad thing?


    Sure they might cut the budget back a bit for the next film but if they do I suspect it'll be to around US$170m.
     
  13. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    46.8% of STID's current revenue has come from the foreign market, which is an improvement over ST2009's 33%.

    However, most big budget summer movies have about 60-70% of their revenue come from overseas markets, so Star Trek is more dependent on the domestic market than most.

    Paramount spent more to make this film, so it's going to be less profitable even if it does a little better overseas. How is that not a disappointment financially?

    Other big budget summer movies are pulling in a lot more.
     
  14. RAMA

    RAMA Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    USA
    Youre figures are incorrect, ST09 is first with an inflation adjusted number of $274 million.

    When all is said and done, STID will make close to $500 million from BO alone. Roughly $110-115 million more than ST09. If it makes anywhere near ST09's $101 million for DVD, or another $50 million for bluray along with the rights for cable, the final tally minus merchandising will be upwards of $650-675 million. You're simply wishing it wasn't so, but the numbers don't back you. Fail

    RAMA
     
  15. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    You don't actually know what Paramount spent to make this film. You've just read the public figure for the overall production budget.

    It cannot have escaped your notice that Paramount has financing partners on the nuTrek films. Do you know what their investments are, what the structure of their deals are, and what they actually intend to accomplish with their investments?

    (Credit will not be given for "to make as much money as possible, duh," or the equivalent. :lol:)
     
  16. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    You apparently didn't read the first sentence of my post.

    I never said it wasn't profitable; just not as profitable as paramount hoped. It's not going to make anywhere near as much as similarly expense summer time movies. I think Paramount was hoping to get it up into that echelon, and it just hasn't worked out.
     
  17. johnjm22

    johnjm22 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Do you doubt that the film cost a similar amount as other summer time special FX laden big budget movies?

    The movie's budget has been reported by multiple reputable publications. Of course no one knows the exact amount, but I don't think anyone would dispute that it's in the ball park of 200M. That's just what it costs to make a film like that today.

    Too much unknown to speculate here. But it seems likely to me that the ROI on STID, isn't as high as it contemporaries for most parties involved.

    Again, Paramount goes out and gets Abrams, ramps up the budget, and makes "nuTrek" a summer time release for obvious reasons. Revenue wise, it's just not living up to films that get similar treatment from their backers.
     
  18. Franklin

    Franklin Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers
    I think many, many folks were probably too optimistic about the domestic gross. In the Bond franchise, "Skyfall" rebounded off a not so good "Quantum of Solace" to make $300 million, domestically. Seeing that, I'd have easily bet STID could follow ST09's $257 million with $300 million. Maybe the four year gap in the movies was too long. Then again, it was four years between "Quantum of Solace" and "Skyfall", so who knows? The Bond movies were November movies, too. The movie world is fickle, I guess.
     
  19. Harvey

    Harvey Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    The sentence where you acknowledge skewing the scales by adjusting all the box office grosses for inflation except for Star Trek (2009)? Admitting that you're doing something nonsensical doesn't mean it suddenly makes sense.

    To your other point, the movie isn't going to be the biggest hit of the summer, but it will likely be among the top ten domestic grossing films of 2013. Worldwide, it's performing far better than any film in the franchise ever has. Speculating about Paramount's financial hopes for the film without a bit of evidence is a waste of time (i.e. "I think Paramount was hoping to get it up into that echelon, and it just hasn't worked out").
     
  20. Belz...

    Belz... Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    Or maybe Bond > Trek.