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. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    with $457 million worldwide, Star Trek Into Darkness is no flop and will eventually make money once Trekkies buy the Blu Rays.

    That a movie can make $457 and still not be in the black is quite mind blowing. I wonder if Nemesis, after a decade of DVD and Bluray re-releases, has finally turned a profit?
     
  2. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    Yup. The marketing for the film definitely could have been better. And I have said several times that, while using Khan was the absolute right choice, keeping the cat in the bag was a poor choice. They could have just gone with it as far back as the early teaser, even used TWOK footage (wouldn't be a first for a Trek teaser).

    Something like:

    Start with delta over a black screen and MontalKhan: "Do you know of the old Klingon proverb that revenge is a dish best served cold? It is very cold in space." Fade into a moving star field slowly zooming on Vengeance, with Shat's "Khan!" echoing in the background. Cut to, CumbyKhan, "Shall we begin?" Fade out to Title, date, credits.

    Obviously, not the best example. I'm just trying to show that something like that would have not only put it out there, but by invoking the obviously inevitable comparison/contrast, they've instantly created a natural buzz on the interwebz.

    Would it made a huge difference? Probably not, but even 5-10% would have bumped the film into the next bracket.
     
  3. Flake

    Flake Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Well, in the UK I felt there was very little advertising on TV.

    There are currently adverts running on UK TV for a new magazine that lets you collect all the starships in Star Trek every fortnight and I am seeing this advert more frequently than I saw adverts for STID!

    EDIT: I have got issue 1 of that and the E-D looks great, though annoyingly because of this Paramount/CBS crap I don't think I will get NuEnt/Kelvin/Vengeance unfortunately.
     
  4. LeadHead

    LeadHead Director of Comedy Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Location:
    LeadHead
    So apparently there'll be a Star Trek Into Darkness and World War Z double feature thing going soon. Wonder how much that will add to the domestic totals.
     
  5. Opus

    Opus Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bloom County
    Yes, I agree with Forbes assessment of STiD. The marketing of the movie was pretty piss poor, and I can say Khan's reveal in the movie was lacking. They should have gone without the secrecy and go with an awesome Khan movie right out of the gate. TOS' main villian is Khan. He's The Joker to Batman. They missed a perfect opportunity.

    That said, still love STiD. Great f-ing flick.
     
  6. Dream

    Dream Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Location:
    Hotel Transylvania
    They are mainly doing that so WWZ can cross 200 Million in America.
     
  7. Dream

    Dream Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Location:
    Hotel Transylvania
    Something interesting about what happens if a film can reach a certain milestone like 200 or 300 million.

    http://badassdigest.com/2013/08/27/...r-it-takes-to-get-world-war-z-to-200-million/
     
  8. LeadHead

    LeadHead Director of Comedy Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Location:
    LeadHead
    That is interesting, I just hope that STID gets some benefit from having this week of double feature screenings.
     
  9. Peach Wookiee

    Peach Wookiee Cuddly Mod of Doom Moderator

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Location:
    Peach Wookiee
    With all due respect, it made its money back some time ago. The budget was $190,000,000. So the profit so far has been $257,000,000.
     
  10. Borgminister

    Borgminister Admiral Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Location:
    California
    Oh no you didn't!
     
  11. bbailey861

    bbailey861 Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Location:
    bbailey861 -- Kingston, ON
    I think this is a great idea and hope they do it in Kingston. I would happily go see the two of them again in a double feature. Is the timing set to coincide with the Blu-ray release?
     
  12. KGator

    KGator Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Location:
    Mentally? . . . that's debatable.
    There are dozens of pages in this thread explaining how that the ticket revenue at the theater does not just all magically get delivered to the movie studios any more than every time you buy a pair of shoes at Foot Locker that all the money goes to Nike.
     
  13. Hober Mallow

    Hober Mallow Commodore Commodore

    Does that figure include marketing and other costs? And is that profit figure money the studio has made, or simply money in tickets sold?

    From the NY Times:
    These are costs which have to be factored in before the studio can make a profit.

    EDIT: This article talks in detail about how movies make a profit, but their short answer is this:
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2013
  14. Noname Given

    Noname Given Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    None Given
    There are ALSO dozens of pages in this thread where people explain how movie studios artificially inflate production budget figures as well. (IE Claim the film cost way more to make than it actually did.)

    In the end, the simple fact is that STiD made $457+ million worldwide to date. If that's not enough to earn a tidy profit in itself - then it's amazing how all these 'poor money loosing studios' in Hollywood survive.
     
  15. Peach Wookiee

    Peach Wookiee Cuddly Mod of Doom Moderator

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Location:
    Peach Wookiee
    Did what?:vulcan: ;)
     
  16. Ovation

    Ovation Vice Admiral Admiral

    Actual costs are unknown to the general public. Stated costs are bullshit numbers that may or may not be in close proximity to the real thing, but there is no way for the general public to know. We can know gross receipts (easy enough to verify). The "double the production cost" calculation is useless as it is based on unverifiable numbers. Many costs are offset by sponsors/product placement, or budgeted in different departments for tax purposes. There are far too many examples of people attempting to get their fair share for work done on films with major gross receipts who've been shunted aside by the "the costs were so high there was no profit" gag that any speculation on this is rather wasted.

    STiD was profitable enough for there to be a sequel. That is really all one needs to know (unless one needs to be privy to the inner financial workings of Paramount). And even if a studio flat out says a film was a financial disappointment (which I've not seen or heard about Trek in such a direct fashion), it does not mean the film was not profitable.
     
  17. Devon

    Devon Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    I would take that Forbes mention with a grain of salt. Paramount, I believe, already reported that "Into Darkness" had made a profit and there was even a story a few weeks ago about how a Chinese film group is battling Paramount over Star Trek Into Darkness' profits.
     
  18. Jax

    Jax Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    The Broken Kingdom of Great Britain
    I would take Forbes and bury it. Anyone who thinks STID is not profitable is either simply wrong or Viacom/Paramounts are the worst company ever who need better accountants.
     
  19. KGator

    KGator Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Location:
    Mentally? . . . that's debatable.
    Yes, that's great but its not really relevant with my point. My point was very simply that you cannot say Movie X's budget (which you agree is an unreliable number) was $100, the ticket sales were $250 and thus the movie made $150. A pretty simplistic, naive and inaccurate statement and easily shown to be false.


    The public's fascination with "box office numbers" is cute but misguided. For the first 6 months the only movie revenue is theater ticket sales. STID will be lucky to make up their P&A (Prints and Advertising) costs with this revenue. Plus ticket sales are only somewhere in the range of 20-30% of a movie's total revenue. Currently STID has probably not even dented its Production budget.

    30-50% of a movie's revenue will be DVD rental, DVD sales and Pay-per-view. The last big portion will be the television licensing fees which is almost pure profit producing revenue due to the major studios incestuous relationships with networks these days.

    In addition a franchise like Star Trek can make more from merchandising and other licensing agreements than your typical Hollywood movie do to books, toys, comics, etc.

    Also, I am not talking about the creative accounting done by the movie studios where movies like Forrest Gump, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Return of the Jedi, Harry Potter, etc, have never made a profit. That's just an example of the big Hollywood Studios ripping off actors, writers, directors, etc, and avoiding paying any taxes. Obviously the people who are important are making money hand over fist. That kind of BS accounting, however, is a discussion in itself.

    STID might never be listed as making an official profit but a lot of people will make a lot of money and that will lead to a sequel which is all people around here really care about.
     
  20. ralph

    ralph Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Location:
    Brazil
    I am disappointed with Japan box office. I expected more from them. Only $4,166,687.:(