The Domestic Box Office run is ending, International is kicking in.

[Jedi_Master]

Forbes is actually a terrible site for entertainment industry analysis; it's not clear that most of their bloggers have any relevant credentials beyond the exaggerated bombast they cobble together for their online bios. The name "Forbes" has enough of a cachet for people to take them more seriously than they deserve, I guess.

This. If you read the byline to many of the "articles" you will find something along the lines of:

This is an article by a Forbes contributor. The thoughts and conclusions contained are his or her own, and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts and conclusions of Forbes, etc. etc.

In other words "We paid some blogger a pittance to create content with a catchy headline."


In any case, just because the opinion piece is found in reputable journal doesn't make the opinion any more valid.

 

[Khan 2.0]

This. If you read the byline to many of the "articles" you will find something along the lines of:

This is an article by a Forbes contributor. The thoughts and conclusions contained are his or her own, and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts and conclusions of Forbes, etc. etc.

In other words "We paid some blogger a pittance to create content with a catchy headline."


In any case, just because the opinion piece is found in reputable journal doesn't make the opinion any more valid.

never realised that. the crazy Scott Mendelson dude is banging out post after post on a daily basis lol

 

[Jedi_Master]

never realised that. the crazy Scott Mendelson dude is banging out post after post on a daily basis lol

Yep. Forbes has been trading on its brand for a while, even though it adheres to news aggregator "journalistic" principles.

 

[Paul Weaver]

In any case, just because the opinion piece is found in reputable journal doesn't make the opinion any more valid.

But it usually means the reputable journal is quickly becoming a non-reputable journal.

 

[Jedi_Master]

But it usually means the reputable journal is quickly becoming a non-reputable journal.

Not necessarily. The NYT has posted some amusing opinion pieces in the past century and a half, but their reporting still makes them a first class source of information.

 

[M'Sharak]

No.





(See how annoying that is <snip>

Jesus! This coming from the guy who's biggest contribution to most discussions here is that annoying Cumberbatch-"nope", that's downright satire!

You know what the difference is, though, between @Dennis deploying a Cumbernope and what you're doing here?

His is a shorthand response to the content of the post to which he's replying - shorthand, because it's standing in for a longer and more detailed reply (to same or similar remarks) which he's already given on numerous occasions previously.

Yours, on the other hand, was not a response to content at all; it was strictly a personal jab and nothing else, intended solely to provoke a reaction. In other words, it had no other purpose than to bait or troll, and you know perfectly well you oughtn't do that.

So don't.

If, in the future, you feel you must address something another poster is doing (rather than addressing the substance of what they have said) THAT'S when you want to use the 'Report' button. Having done so, you'll then step back and let staff take care of it. This is the way things work.

 

[KGator]

Great news Trekkies(not you fakers rooting against it..boo) Beyond was slightly higher than my prediction officially at $318,080,627. I believe this does not count the Sunday China figures which have not been announced just yet (due shortly). So in fact, it'll be slightly higher than this total.

Edit: The Sunday China figures are in: $3.47 million. $11.3 million weekend. #1 film in China for the second weekend. Beyond total: $321,550,627

I think you are getting confused. The China numbers you read on Deadline, BOM, etc INCLUDE Sunday in their totals. They are 12 hours ahead over there. It seems like you are getting the "Weekend total", then you see the "Sunday" number and end up adding the Sunday box office again. The totals we get on Sunday afternoon and evening in the US are the Monday morning weekend totals from mainland China. They are just giving you the actual daily breakdown for Sunday AFTER the weekend totals.

 

[Amaris]

$318 million and still in theaters is terrific!

 

[KGator]

PS There are other articles that discuss why Paramount did not actually spend $185 million on the film. While I do NOT know the exact number, I'm willing to bet it's significantly less than that, so I'd also be willing to bet that in the absence of exact figures, that $320 million is already a break even point for Paramount. Until then I will keep using the $185 million figure but with that caveat.

RAMA

I would also take $185 million with a grain of salt, but not in the same manner you have. Someone did a study of reported budgets versus actual budgets (when such financials have to be disclosed for industry rebates or due to litigation). The study found that most budgets reported publicly in the media are actually lower than the true budget with the actual budget usually being higher by anywhere from 5-15%.

 

[Rahul]

PS There are other articles that discuss why Paramount did not actually spend $185 million on the film. While I do NOT know the exact number, I'm willing to bet it's significantly less than that, so I'd also be willing to bet that in the absence of exact figures, that $320 million is already a break even point for Paramount. Until then I will keep using the $185 million figure but with that caveat.
RAMA

I would also take $185 million with a grain of salt, but not in the same manner you have. Someone did a study of reported budgets versus actual budgets (when such financials have to be disclosed for industry rebates or due to litigation). The study found that most budgets reported publicly in the media are actually lower than the true budget with the actual budget usually being higher by anywhere from 5-15%.

I think what @RAMA was referring to, was the money that went into the script that Bob Orci wrote that was thrown into the bin when Lin and Pegg took over. Rumored to be about 30 mio., that went into pre-production, location scouting, early production design etc.

As such, the movie that was shown in cinemas cost probably only around 155 mio. I think RAMA meant that those costs don't actually count, and the movie would be in the black numbers already. Of course those costs are still costs that somebody needs to pay the bill for. So in the end, even if not all the money went on the screen, the production cost still sits at 185 mio. plus the marketing budget.

 

[Shalashaska]

$318 million and still in theaters is terrific!

Eh.

 

[Khan 2.0]

I think what @RAMA was referring to, was the money that went into the script that Bob Orci wrote that was thrown into the bin when Lin and Pegg took over. Rumored to be about 30 mio., that went into pre-production, location scouting, early production design etc.

As such, the movie that was shown in cinemas cost probably only around 155 mio. I think RAMA meant that those costs don't actually count, and the movie would be in the black numbers already. Of course those costs are still costs that somebody needs to pay the bill for. So in the end, even if not all the money went on the screen, the production cost still sits at 185 mio. plus the marketing budget.

ironically Orcis movie probably would've brought in more money/been a bigger success (less budget 150m, more hooks for the audience/more of an event for the 50th - Shatner/timetravel/prime timeline stuff, possible May release, and no Fast&Furious in Space early trailer!)

 

[Amaris]

Eh.

Well I think it's terrific.

 

[RAMA]

I get the daily totals before they do a story on those websites you mention or any box office site updates. So no I didn't confuse anything, however, it IS possible they got the number at Mojo before they released their Sunday update. Last week for example, as I was doing the math, they did NOT include the Sunday total till the Tuesday update. I'd be willing to revise it, but at this point I'll wait till the small update they do on Tuesday afternoon.

I think you are getting confused. The China numbers you read on Deadline, BOM, etc INCLUDE Sunday in their totals. They are 12 hours ahead over there. It seems like you are getting the "Weekend total", then you see the "Sunday" number and end up adding the Sunday box office again. The totals we get on Sunday afternoon and evening in the US are the Monday morning weekend totals from mainland China. They are just giving you the actual daily breakdown for Sunday AFTER the weekend totals.

 

[RAMA]

Well I think it's terrific.

It's not $500 million but it is quite good. In terms of psychological impact..with us hysterical Trekkies and sensationalist, panicky media (like Forbes) getting closer to ST09 is important. Perception often is more important that perfection. Here's how it looks list-wise:

Top 4 ST Movie Box Office All-Time:

1) Star Trek Into Darkness: $467,381,469
2) Star Trek 09: $385,680,446
3) Star Trek Beyond: $$322,787,609*
4) Star Trek First Contact: $146,027,888

*Still in release(estimate)

Not all movie franchises are an upward curve with box office, certain factors from their release times can affect them. There's really no reason to believe ST4 would continue a downward curve, because there is no trend yet. The only real trend is that the 3 JJ movies have made almost half of the overall total of the 13 Trek movies.

RAMA

 

[Rahul]

ironically Orcis movie probably would've brought in more money/been a bigger success (less budget 150m, more hooks for the audience/more of an event for the 50th - Shatner/timetravel/prime timeline stuff, possible May release, and no Fast&Furious in Space early trailer!)

Maybe. But possibly not. JJ Abrams is a tremendously good director. The first two movies have many weaknesses, but they work as movies. That is almost entirely because of the directing, because the scripts are pretty awful.

Bob Orci has never directed anything in his life, his sole experience comes from hanging around on the set while technically versed directors like Michael Bay shoot his weak scripts.

If a movie has already started production, you need to fuck up really bad for the studio to take the movie away from you again. Scrapping a production that already has begun is literally one of the worst possible options a company can do. If they decide to do so, they must have been really desperate. That we haven't heard anything about new projects from Orci since then speaks volumes. If you ask me, if Paramount had gone through with Orci's script, there wouldn't have been a finished movie. This guy can write easily understandable dialogue. But apparently he just wasn't capable of diirecting and delivering a complete, finished film until the release date.

That's why they went to Justin Lin. He's not a genius famous visionary or anything. But he can finish a complete, internally working, watchable movie in time.

 

[BJ Wagner]

It's good to see the Chinese boxoffice helping out with the bottom line. Hopefully Discovery will be a hit and help the next film to perform better. We need a tie breaker. Seems we fans are a bit divided as to which sequal is better.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

The Hollywood Reporter is reporting Star Trek Beyond earned $11.3 million over the past weekend. The film dropped 66% from the first weekend.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/china-box-office-star-trek-927723

 

[Borgminister]

Axes grinding.

 

[KGator]

Through Monday STB has made approximately $54.8 million in China. It looks like it will exceed the amount of STID but not by that much. Not nearly enough to consider it a success in China when you consider the expansion in that country. There are 1.5 to 2 times as many theaters in China now as there were in 2013.