Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Devon, Sep 5, 2013.
The world's a lot bigger than your country.
Am sorry, I know this may be off topic but what the heck is on your Avatar?
You are glamorising Killing an actor because you don't want to see him in a film role. Please I find that disturbing and it is doesn't make you look cool. All is does is confirm how messed up many Nolan fans are.
You guys need to stop playing God with peoples lives. Has it ever occurred to you that neither The Joker, Batman or even Star Trek is real? Ben Affleck is actually a real person, he has a wife and 3 kids. there is no need to kill this man just because you don't want to see him play a fictional character like Batman.
Back to the topic. Star Trek is far from broken but it is showing a few cracks. A few cracks that can be fixed with a great film in 2016.
They were always a JJ Abrams Trek advocacy website. I guess they're still coming to terms that STID failed at bringing in new fans w/out alienating too many old fans the way the first movie did. Which was basically the reboots mission statement.
I think we should allow Chuck respond to the questions posed about his avatar before pursuing this line of discussion.
Chuck, are you advocating the killing of Ben Affleck as your avatar reads?
^Massive increases in overseas revenue would seem to completely negate that statement
At the worldwide box-office, it is quite possible that Star Trek 2009 would have beaten STiD if Trek 09 had been released in 3D and IMAX 3D.
STiD didn't do that well domestically and am sure the film would not even be in the top 5 Trek films when you take away the 3D and IMAX 3D price tags and adjust the TOS films by inflation.
According to box-office mojo this is where all the films stands
1 Star Trek (2009): $281,911,,800
2 Star Trek: The Motion Picture Par: $267,421,900
3 Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home Par: $235,578,900
4 Star Trek Into Darkness Par. $222,573,400
5 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: $219,023,700
6 Star Trek III: The Search for Spock Par: $185,715,400
7 Star Trek: First Contact Par: $169,249,700
8 Star Trek: Generations Par: $147,250,100
9 Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country:$146,029,200
10 Star Trek: Insurrection Par: $119,941,300
11 Star Trek V: The Final Frontier: $107,313,400
12 Star Trek: Nemesis: $60,059,900
STiD ranks 4th, however if you were to take out the inflated 3D and IMAX prices of the film, am sure the film's gross would be around $180,000,000-$195,000,000 or even less. It is quite possible that TWOK and TSOS made more money than STiD domestically.
STiD may technically be the 6th highest grossing Trek film and that's not great.
1. Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013) $462 million 2. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) $447.1 million 3. Star Trek (2009) $419.8 million 4. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) $283.4 million 5. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) $234.2 million 6. Star Trek: First Contact (1996) $223.2 million 7. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) $195.5 million 8. Star Trek: Generations (1994) $189.1 million 9. Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) $168.8 million 10. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) $166.1 million 11. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) $132.2 million 12. Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) $87.4 million Source: 1701News
Above you see the Top Star Trek World Box Office - Adjusted For Inflation chart. I have updated STID's box office figure to its current one. It's likely to top out at around $470 million.
But here's the thing, it'll likely make another $100million in DVD sales and maybe the same again in blu-ray sales. And you know they will be issuing different versions on different formats for years to come.
STID is likely to be one of Paramounts most profitable movies over the long run. I'd make the same point about Star Trek Nemesis - sure it was beaten by Maid in Manhatten, but I'd bet the house that Star Trek Nemesis will have sold more DVD's and Blu-Rays than MIM.
As the above chart proves, Star Trek Into Darkness is a success. Ignore the crazy fans who say otherwise!!
Trekmovie.com was pro reboot ran by Anthony Pascale who posted here often but he has since gone AWOL and this article was posted by someone else. His views probably do not reflect APs
You cannot compare inflation adjusted movies from 1979 onward to todays STID gross. Two completely different eras and totally different marketplaces etc due to a number of reasons.... (need to prepare a statement for whenever this gets brought up I think )
I saw it online, I thought it was funny, I used it. I'm skeptical about Affleck playing Batman, but I'm willing to give him a chance. I love Nolan as a director and creator, but I'm not as rabid as you think. I'm not advocating actually killing Ben Affleck, I just thought it was a funny meme.
I don't see how anyone can think Star Trek is broken. It was broken after Nemesis and Enterprise. Trek09 gave the franchise a much needed retooling and boost. I say Star Trek is thriving once more. STiD was a fun and great Trek movie. My only complaint is that the powers that be should not wait 4 years to put out the next movie!
Anthony needs a break and I don't blame him for taking time of the site. Running a site like that can BURN you out, trust me I know, especially if you have to do other work to generate an income. He will come back when he is ready, right now its the perfect down time to take a break.
If a franchise's "brokenness" or lack thereof is directly related to how much a given film makes, then I guess you can say Star Wars wasn't broken when they had financial success with Phantom Menace, which was one of the highest grossing films of all time even though many "fans" hated Phantom Menace, hated the special editions, etc., but they sure did bring in the money.
So I guess it depends on your definition of "broken." If we're talking financial success, then no, Star Trek is definitely not broken. If we're talking whether or not the films will stand the test of time, that's a matter of speculation. If we're talking the quality of the storytelling, acting, etc., that's a matter of personal opinion. "Broken" can mean a number of things to a number of different people. Sounds like this writer is using "broken" as an opinion. And he has every right to do so. And we all have a right to agree or disagree.
The sad truth is that STiD wont fair all that well when you take away the advantage it has over the 11 other films.
The 3D and IMAX 3D prices. If you take that away, STiD's box office may just be a little over 400m or less.
Should we handicap all the films the same way? Should we hold it against TMP that it got to spend six months in wide spread release as opposed to the three that Into Darkness got? Should we hold it against TMP that it was released in December and got the playing field mostly to itself where Into Darkness got sandwiched between Iron Man 3 and Fast and Furious 6? Should we hold it against TMP that it was the only new live-action Trek in a decade and that there were only 79 episodes of Trek where Into Darkness was following on from seven-hundred hours of Trek?
Every movie has favorable and unfavorable conditions that it has to deal with. Like it or not, Into Darkness is the number two money earner in the Trek movie series.
Star Trek has always shown a few cracks. Show me a time when it hasn't. A few months at the end of 1986 and the beginning of 1987 before TNG came out and was panned by TOS fans of the day?
No. "They" being one guy who had little idea what he was talking about and used a major site like TrekMovie to remind the rest of the world why people think we're stupid and should be ignored. TrekWeb didn't help by suggesting that TrekMovie is going with this view as a whole.
Yeah, but no one is doing this... except you... again...
There are always ways to improve Star Trek, constructive criticism should always be welcome. And this article does have some good constructive criticism.
But the article also refers to boxoffice & popularity. And to claim that Star Trek is broken in that regard is ludicrous. While many people are trying their best to put a negative spin on the boxoffice numbers (less than expected performance in the US market, high production budget,etc), this movie is a big boxoffice hit and presumably will do great in home video too. Star Trek was broken in terms of popularity before the 2009 movie but not anymore.
And while individual opinions vary on this or any other Trek movie the general consensus among Trek fans or mainstream moviegoers seems positive, e.g. Cinemascore, IMDB ratings, rottentomatoes, trekbbs poll etc.
It would have been nice if this person had labled his article "Ways to improve Star Trek" instead of "Star Trek is broken" but the latter generates more publicity. Anthony, the owner of trekmovie.com, gave a positive review of the movie so this obviously doesn't reflect his opinion.
No you should not...Well not really. Nonetheless the 3D and IMAX 3D unconditional helps films earn more money. It doesn't matter if the film has competitions at the Box Office or what time of the year it is released.
ST09 had to compete with the Da Vinci Code sequel and X-Men Origins and the film more than held its own.
ST09 made more money than STiD because it was a better film. STiD should have more than held its own against other movie competitors like IM3 and FF6.
In 2007, Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Caribbean and Shrek 3 all came out in the month of May and each earned around the same. Their opening weekend exceeded 100m dollars...each.
Iron Man was going into its 3rd week when STiD was released, which means Trek should have pulled in more than a 100 million dollars over the 4 day holiday period but it only made 84m.
The truth is that there is something about STiD that turned a lot of people off. It is Paramount's duty to try and figure out what.
I know the biggest criticism of the film is the rip off, Homage, remake, rehash of WOK and the Khan scream.
STiD been the second most successful Trek might be good but it still nothing to brag about when you consider how much it earned compared to a film series like Superman which has raked in more than 650m worldwide.
The Truth is that Paramount is disappointed with STiD box office performance. it is no secret.
You work for Paramount, then?
Separate names with a comma.