RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,416
Posts: 5,506,442
Members: 25,130
Currently online: 465
Newest member: 2278

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


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 July 14 2013, 12:14 AM   #2821
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Out Of My Vulcan Mind wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
But I've seen other film makers talk about needing 2.5 times the production budget to break even. So which is it? It doesn't seem like even those in the know really agree on how much a film needs to make to be successful.

It seems the only thing we know is that we really don't know much.
Soderbergh was talking about 2X total costs, i.e. production budget and distribution and marketing costs. Other filmmakers will sometimes talk about 2.5X production budget alone.
Soderbergh probably got that number from a studio executive.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 12:17 AM   #2822
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]

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Soderbergh probably got that number from a studio executive.
I'm sure he knows better than to take their word for anything.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 01:38 AM   #2823
Spock/Uhura Fan
Captain
 
Spock/Uhura Fan's Avatar
 
Location: Where It's At.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Well, I guess it's time to check my PMs.
__________________
MA'AM. Hot damn, I can dig it.

“The history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” - Virginia Woolf
Spock/Uhura Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 02:18 AM   #2824
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Inflating the budget for tax purposes is an industrywide practice. It's also useful for playing games with profit participants. Forbes had pegged the true and correct budget for ST09 at 120.5 million. I haven't seen anything on STID, but my personal, uneducated guess would be 145-165 million.

Note that World War Z, from the same studio, has an identical reported (i.e. false) budget of 190 million. It's global run is projected to conclude about 20 million below STID. I believe its sequel has also been greenlit.

Our canon enthusiast had neglected to mention that.
__________________
Last Vote: 2takesfrakes, T'Girl, wulfio. Next Vote: Joel Kirk, orphalesion, Hapless Crewman, Synnove, HIjol.
thumbtack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 02:23 AM   #2825
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]

thumbtack wrote: View Post
Inflating the budget for tax purposes is an industrywide practice. It's also useful for playing games with profit participants. Forbes had pegged the true and correct budget for ST09 at 120.5 million.
Can you provide a link for that?

Note that World War Z, from the same studio, has an identical reported (i.e. false) budget of 190 million. It's global run is projected to conclude about 20 million below STID. I believe its sequel has also been greenlit.
What projections are you referring to? That seems on the low side. World War Z looks likely to have a worldwide gross a little higher than STID.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 02:41 AM   #2826
Dream
Admiral
 
Dream's Avatar
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

thumbtack wrote: View Post
Note that World War Z, from the same studio, has an identical reported (i.e. false) budget of 190 million. It's global run is projected to conclude about 20 million below STID. I believe its sequel has also been greenlit.
It's all about expectations.

WWZ was went way over budget due to bad planning, and everyone expected it to flop, but it looks like it is going to be a small hit now. They've learned what not to do, and the next movie should have a much more reasonable budget. That is the reason why it looks like WWZ will be getting a sequel.

STID was expected to blow the roof off and make way more than the original move, of course that didn't happen. I blame the moronic choice of keeping Khan a secret in all the trailers. I still expect a sequel, but Paramount will be thinking twice before giving the next movie a very large budget.
Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 02:46 AM   #2827
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]

Dream wrote: View Post
WWZ was went way over budget due to bad planning, and everyone expected it to flop, but it looks like it is going to be a small hit now. They've learned what not to do, and the next movie should have a much more reasonable budget. That is the reason why it looks like WWZ will be getting a sequel.
World War Z is on track for a good return, the kind of return that usually leads to a sequel, even against its inflated budget, though they can hedge against any potential drop-off for a sequel by bringing it in on a lower budget.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:10 AM   #2828
Noname Given
Vice Admiral
 
Location: None Given
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Spock/Uhura Fan wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
^Since the last few pages of this thread have centered around folks trying to prove Into Darkness was unsuccessful, I'm going with that.
Except that hasn't happened. All I've seen is people posting facts.

I think you have more people on this thread that seem to have a problem with the numbers not supporting "best movie evah!!1!" That's okay though. I think the last comment I read was about how someone doesn't think the $190 million budget was actually really spent on making the film, lol.
Given your facts are always something like:

"If you take away X mount of money that STID made because of <insert ridiculous arbitrary reason here> then STID is a failure..."

I wouldn't put much stock in your analysis.

As for ST:ID - It's brought in the most money of any Star trek feature film to date; and that is a fact. Further, no one is saying it's the best movie ever; but they are saying it's a good and very successful Star Trek film.
Noname Given is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:27 AM   #2829
Spock/Uhura Fan
Captain
 
Spock/Uhura Fan's Avatar
 
Location: Where It's At.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

^Untrue. But I'm not putting any stock in your posts, either.

BillJ wrote: View Post
MacLeod wrote: View Post
If you not I used the word IF, I made no comment on if it was right or not.
It seems Hollywood has been playing a shell game with production costs and revenue for years in order to short-change the various people who would see more money from higher profits...

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00045706.html

"This lopsided distribution of earnings comes about as a direct result of Defendants' practice of understating gross receipts, delaying payments to Merlose 2, overstating production and distribution costs and hindering Merlose 2's ability to verify the revenues and costs associated with the films it funded," so read the complaint.
This is not the first time Paramount faces a lawsuit over similar case, which is also known as "Hollywood accounting". Back in 2008, Melrose 1 sued the studio over security fraud and the financing company was seeking for $30 million in damages.
So I'm not sure how anyone can really take anything associated with Hollywood numbers as gospel.
And I’m not sure that anyone can take what’s said in a complaint as gospel, either. There are 2 sides to the story, and no one on the sidelines really knows.

Rather than just going off of the complaint, I wanted to see what the result was. I expected some sort of out-of-court settlement, and that’s what happened. To be fair, I think it’s only right to see what Paramount had to say about it:

Paramount via Deadline wrote:
”… the Melrose 2 investors have already received almost 90% of their investment back under the financing agreement, and a number of the films in which they participate (such as the successful Transformers 3)”
http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/para...-transformers/

We don’t know what the financing agreement was or what happened with it, but no one here can know enough to say that it’s all Paramount. Don’t misunderstand me, I’m personally not a fan of the studio, but that’s neither here nor there. I also don’t know anything about Melrose 2, and so I can’t say if they’re on the up-and-up or not with their claims.

One thing I did find interesting is that they got their case against Paramount in California thrown out (essentially, because they were told they had to "amend" it), seemingly because they were trying to sue the studio at the same time for the exact same thing in New York, or at least that’s what I got from this:

Deadline wrote:
New York law will take precedence over Californa’s in Melrose 2 financiers’ lawsuit against Paramount Pictures and DW Studios, Judge Michael Linfield has ruled. Because New York law doesn’t recognize redundant claims on matters based on the same evidence, Judge Linfield dismissed Melrose 2′s claims under California law of breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing as well as unfair completion. “These allegations are no different than the allegations underlying plaintiff’s breach of contract claim and plaintiff has alleged that each of these duties are contractual obligations governed by the agreement,” Linfield wrote in his ruling.
http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/melr...mount-trimmed/


Take from it what you will…

MacLeod wrote: View Post
Spock/Uhura Fan wrote: View Post
^Just like no one said the movie was completely "unsuccessful," just disappointing. Now anyone posting what you might not agree with is a "naysayer," okay.

As to the rest of your comment, I'm just going to say the same thing I said to Bill. You'll get another movie, so there's no need...
ST (2009) did US$385 on a reported budget of US$150m if you use the ballpark x2 that means a profit of US$85

STID has thus far done US$444m on a reported budget of US$190 using the same x2 multipler would be a profit of US$65m.

So slightly down but as the film hasn't yet finished it's box offie run around the world the final figure might not be too dissimliar from ST (2009).

Perhaps the only place where Paramount might be dissapointed is at the US & Canada box office as many other countries showed growth in terms of takings
Yeah, it might get there. We'll see...
__________________
MA'AM. Hot damn, I can dig it.

“The history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” - Virginia Woolf
Spock/Uhura Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:37 AM   #2830
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]

All you have to do is google "Hollywood Accounting" and you'll find some interesting reading. It simply proves that we really know absolutely nothing as far as whether a film is financially successful or not.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:42 AM   #2831
Spock/Uhura Fan
Captain
 
Spock/Uhura Fan's Avatar
 
Location: Where It's At.
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Kind of like Nielsen ratings, but definitely not exactly, if all of Hollywood is doing their "accounting" in the same way, then at least they have the same baseline, so to speak.

Anyway, I'm happy to say that we don't know if the film is a success/failure or somewhere in between, but it seems like that's not the case with everyone.
__________________
MA'AM. Hot damn, I can dig it.

“The history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” - Virginia Woolf
Spock/Uhura Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:43 AM   #2832
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]

BillJ wrote: View Post
All you have to do is google "Hollywood Accounting" and you'll find some interesting reading. It simply proves that we really know absolutely nothing as far as whether a film is financially successful or not.
That's an overstatement.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:44 AM   #2833
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

Dream wrote: View Post
STID was expected to blow the roof off and make way more than the original move, of course that didn't happen. I blame the moronic choice of keeping Khan a secret in all the trailers. I still expect a sequel, but Paramount will be thinking twice before giving the next movie a very large budget.
Or...

They will change their marketing strategy for the next movie.
__________________
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 July 14 2013, 03:47 AM   #2834
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

They'll simply continue to emphasize those aspects of the movies that sell well in foreign markets. The next one will probably be more action-oriented and less talky than even this one. I'm sure they'll find a way to make it back to Earth for the climax, as well.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 14 2013, 03:50 AM   #2835
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]

They might trim the budget down a bit, but the next one will still have a very sizeable budget. They'll definitely make the next one a 3D release again. It's too important to the Asian box office not to.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind 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 09:53 AM.

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