RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,734
Posts: 5,432,844
Members: 24,836
Currently online: 438
Newest member: crazycornuts

TrekToday headlines

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17


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 22 2013, 05:28 PM   #2356
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]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
That's conjecture. What does it even mean in this case, to "average out"?
Because I want to know how many people saw it total, so local theatres don't matter.

Once you've answered that, apply it to a different era, when there were far fewer theaters, like, say, the silent era in 1915.
I already admitted that it has its flaws. This is the third time that I say that there are no ways to reliably compare movies financially across different time periods.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 05:33 PM   #2357
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Also, how are the "adjusted numbers" figured? Is it based on inflation or change in ticket prices? Because it seems to me that these calculations often fail to hold true to either.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 05:33 PM   #2358
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Belz... wrote: View Post

I already admitted that it has its flaws. This is the third time that I say that there are no ways to reliably compare movies financially across different time periods.


Conditions are just so radically different across the decades that there is simply no fair way to compare films from differing eras.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 05:40 PM   #2359
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Belz... wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
That's conjecture. What does it even mean in this case, to "average out"?
Because I want to know how many people saw it total, so local theatres don't matter.
Well, if that's the data you're after, then fine. However, you don't even need to know anything about "averaging out" for that.

My point in raising the examples was that, without the consideration of additional data, that alone doesn't correspond to what one means by the term "popularity" (or, for that matter, even the term "interest").

BillJ wrote: View Post
Conditions are just so radically different across the decades that there is simply no fair way to compare films from differing eras.
Yep. It's an apples-to-oranges world.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:03 PM   #2360
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Beyerstein wrote: View Post
How would number of tickets sold not be the best way to measure the popularity of movies during their theatrical runs?
1.) Value - Out of pocket hurt the wallet far less back in the day vs. today. The 'amount' for 2 people to go to a movie is far higher today.

2.) Options - Movies used to be the only game in town. If you don't see a film in the theater, you will most likely never see it. Now if you don't see it, wait a couple of months and it's out on BD, or Netflix, or OnDemand, or Premium Cable...

3.) Cost - It costs more for studios to make movies today. From explosive salaries because actors are no longer signed under contract by studios, to explosive SFX prices, films that draw audiences need to spend more. And the price reflects it.
__________________
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 22 2013, 08:23 PM   #2361
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

And it's getting harder for the blockbuster films to recoup their costs. For "Man of Steel", a film with a budget of $225, to be successful, it will need at least $450 million in profits. Not improbable. However, the number of films that make over $500 million is small, and there has to be a ceiling there.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:29 PM   #2362
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]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Well, if that's the data you're after, then fine. However, you don't even need to know anything about "averaging out" for that.
What I meant was simply that taking into consideration all theatres eliminates the problem you mentioned.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:30 PM   #2363
The Transformed Man
Commander
 
The Transformed Man's Avatar
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
View The Transformed Man's Twitter Profile
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

$855,000 for Friday. So probably a $2.5 million weekend.

Yancy
__________________
I have no... precious time at all to spend... nor service to do, till you...
The Transformed Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:39 PM   #2364
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
3.) Cost - It costs more for studios to make movies today. From explosive salaries because actors are no longer signed under contract by studios, to explosive SFX prices, films that draw audiences need to spend more. And the price reflects it.
We'd need cost AND gross in order to be able to at least get a grasp of how good a movie did. Unfortunately even BoxOfficeMojo doesn't have costs for the older movies, and as Buzzkill mentioned we're not exactly clear on how much these movies cost today.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 08:54 PM   #2365
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Belz... wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Well, if that's the data you're after, then fine. However, you don't even need to know anything about "averaging out" for that.
What I meant was simply that taking into consideration all theatres eliminates the problem you mentioned.
No, it doesn't. If you're only counting tickets sold, you can't count seats that aren't there. Remember, the question, as phrased, was whether tickets sold is a good measure of popularity.

The fact that seats would be filled, if only they were available, has to determined by considering more information. Again, this may not be important for the measure you're considering, but it matters when gaging the interest level in a movie. Observing that you're selling a lot of tickets for the area you're in might help in deciding whether to expand the distribution of a film, or, when considering films in aggregate, it might help in deciding to build more theaters.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 09:00 PM   #2366
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

throwback wrote: View Post
And it's getting harder for the blockbuster films to recoup their costs. For "Man of Steel", a film with a budget of $225, to be successful, it will need at least $450 million in profits.
This is a bogus fallacy that's been bandied about these boards for years. Untrue.
__________________
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 22 2013, 10:02 PM   #2367
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Opus wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
And it's getting harder for the blockbuster films to recoup their costs. For "Man of Steel", a film with a budget of $225, to be successful, it will need at least $450 million in profits.
This is a bogus fallacy that's been bandied about these boards for years. Untrue.
I don't think Throwback means what was posted. I believe what throwback meant was MoS needs to take in about $450M in order to show a profit. It would be insane to say it needs to have $450M in Profit to be successful, it would need to take in about a Billion to cover a $450M profit

Basic formula that's used around here, I believe is,
Budget + half of Budget for Marketing = Break Even/Profitable
Studio only gets about 1/3 of Foreign Box Office

STID:
$190M Budget + $95M = $285M
$214.5M Domestic + $67M (1/3 of $201.7 Foreign) = $281.5
This is with a current figure of $416M

So, The other 4 countries who are to still to release it, The DVD/BD, TV sales and Netflix is all gravy, because the box office has already covered the cost of making the film (The Studios don't want to consider After-theater in Profitability, they want that all to be gravy)

How much Man of Steel needs to bring in, depends upon what percent is Foreign vs Domestic
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?

Last edited by Sindatur; June 22 2013 at 10:18 PM.
Sindatur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 10:11 PM   #2368
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]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
No, it doesn't. If you're only counting tickets sold, you can't count seats that aren't there.
It doesn't matter, if we want to know how many times it was seen in theatres. You are creating a problem that doesn't exist.

The fact that seats would be filled, if only they were available, has to determined by considering more information.
That would certainly be a very interesting piece of information if it were available, but the factors getting those seats filled are impossible to determine anyway.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 10:28 PM   #2369
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Oh, good grief. Moving on....
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 22 2013, 10:39 PM   #2370
Beyerstein
Captain
 
Beyerstein's Avatar
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Opus wrote: View Post
Beyerstein wrote: View Post
How would number of tickets sold not be the best way to measure the popularity of movies during their theatrical runs?
1.) Value - Out of pocket hurt the wallet far less back in the day vs. today. The 'amount' for 2 people to go to a movie is far higher today.

2.) Options - Movies used to be the only game in town. If you don't see a film in the theater, you will most likely never see it. Now if you don't see it, wait a couple of months and it's out on BD, or Netflix, or OnDemand, or Premium Cable...

3.) Cost - It costs more for studios to make movies today. From explosive salaries because actors are no longer signed under contract by studios, to explosive SFX prices, films that draw audiences need to spend more. And the price reflects it.
That stuff is all irrelevant though. If you just wanna compare what kind of business two movies did you just wanna know how many people went and saw this movie and how many people went and saw that movie.

Like, Avatar is one of the highest grossing movies ever, but with the 3D surcharges it was also one of the most expensive movies to go see ever, so how is that meaningful data?
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 03:35 AM.

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