Why didn't Beyond do better at the Box Office?

[JeffinOakland]

Besides James Bond or Star Wars; what other franchises have proven hugely successful even with critically and publicly derided installments. I mean, there's a joke that Disney could have filmed 2 hours of cats cleaning themselves, called it Star Wars, and still made a Billion. Aside from those two, every other franchise has to make very good movies in order to make the bank. It's just about impossible to make a very good movie every time.

 

[Kemaiku]

Disney or Pixar literally did have a movie of animals shitting in the woods for two hours and made two sequels, it's fucking ridiculous.

 

[urbandefault]

It's clear by the drop this weekend that Star Trek seems to have lost 'general audience' viewers.

I read a couple of things on some entertainment and box office tracking sites and the consensus is that while Beyond is a disappointment, it's not a franchise sinker but rather a franchise re-thinker. Paramount is clearly going to have reexamine all aspects of this movie and how to proceed going forward. The most likely scenario is Star Trek 4 which has already been green-lit will face a lower budget my guess is around $130 million (the thinking in Hollywood these days is that you cannot make a blockbuster for less than $100 million).

I don't think this is a total surprise to Paramount though because all indications going into Beyond was that the domestic box office would be lower, but they seem to have been counting on a higher international box office like STID and that doesn't seem to be happening for them. The international Trek records set but STID seems to be a fluke (I think some of the European success had to do with Benedict Cumberbatch who has a huge following).

A couple of sites seem to agree with a lot of the feedback here that Paramount blundered the promotion for this movie. In fact, Paramount seems to have treated Beyond like a dud and seemed surprised that the movie was the critical hit it has been. The last minute marketing campaign seemed to suggest Paramount wasn't confident in this movie. The reaction to the original teaser trailer was overwhelmingly negative and Paramount should have released a second trailer within weeks rather than waiting months, which allowed concern to grow within the fandom. Added to the fact that Paramount didn't take advantage of the 50th anniversary when promoting Beyond. The lack of promotion failed to make buzz around this movie and the little buzz that there was around it until the second trailer came out was mostly negative and added fueled by Beyond's troubled production start.

Added to this is Paramount has been ineffective and keeping the franchise alive between films (the 4 and 3 years gaps are too long in the modern crowded market). I know Star Trek is a different animal than Marvel movies or even Star Wars who have new movies every year but Paramount needed more to keep the buzz going.

Star Trek will never be a mainstream blockbuster, Star Wars wears the crown for sci-fi franchises, but the 09 movie did create a lot of more casual fans but they seem to have slipped away now. I also wonder if Beyond was the right movie for the 50th anniversary. There just didn't seem to be anything special about - it's a good movie but maybe not what was needed for this anniversary.

Jeepers, Mr. Kent.

In the midst of all the forecast doom and gloom has anyone thought to ask Paramount what they think? I mean, they did already announce that there will be one more.

 

[Kemaiku]

They announced 4 before Beyond fully released around the globe. They haven't gone back on that a week after global reception has filtered in to them.

They can't be that concerned or they'd have said...anything.

 

[timtonruben359]

They announced 4 before Beyond fully released around the globe. They haven't gone back on that a week after global reception has filtered in to them.

They can't be that concerned or they'd have said...anything.

Studios rarely publicly comment on box office. Yes Star Trek 4 has been green-lit but it's possible Paramount could just keep it in development hell for years with it never getting produced. I know it's hard for us Trek fans to look at the franchise objectively but Beyond is officially a box office disappointment. Not a Franchise killer, but a disappointment.

Star Trek 4 will be made on a lower budget.

 

[urbandefault]

I know it's hard for us Trek fans to look at the franchise objectively

I don't include myself in that group.

 

[timtonruben359]

Jeepers, Mr. Kent.

In the midst of all the forecast doom and gloom has anyone thought to ask Paramount what they think? I mean, they did already announce that there will be one more.

The announcing of a sequel before the movie even comes out is fairly frequent now and is done 1) because of confidence in the movie and 2) because it often seen as drumming up box office.

Paramount will never openly say what they really think I mean they're trying to sell a product after all and openly admitting they're disappointed could further kill box office. I remember when Nemesis came out and opened in second place and Paramount was trying to put a positive spin on it saying we're right where we expected to be.

The truth is Beyond had the second lowest opening weekend of any Trek film (if you take into account inflation) and the third largest opening weekend to second weekend drop in franchise history.

The movie is officially a box office disappointment which doesn't make it a bad movie though. Truth is Star Trek 4 will likely still happen for a number of reasons: Beyond is still the most successful paramount film this year, the drop in box office could just be a fluke in what has been a bad summer for tent pole franchises, ST 4 could be done a lower budget etc.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

Announcing a sequel is a marketing tool by the studios. It does not always become a reality. Sony announced a sequel for Ghostbusters (2016) - another film from this summer that underperformed.. According to the director Feig, it needed $500 million if the film was to be considered a success and for there to be a sequel. (Ghostbusters was made for $144 million.)

 

[Cyrus]

The early estimate for Suicide Squad next weekend is $140M. Wow, i guess another big drop for STB is inevitable. The best hope is some audiance spillover due to sell outs.

 

[urbandefault]

The announcing of a sequel before the movie even comes out is fairly frequent now and is done 1) because of confidence in the movie and 2) because it often seen as drumming up box office.

Paramount will never openly say what they really think I mean they're trying to sell a product after all and openly admitting they're disappointed could further kill box office. I remember when Nemesis came out and opened in second place and Paramount was trying to put a positive spin on it saying we're right where we expected to be.

The truth is Beyond had the second lowest opening weekend of any Trek film (if you take into account inflation) and the third largest opening weekend to second weekend drop in franchise history.

The movie is officially a box office disappointment which doesn't make it a bad movie though. Truth is Star Trek 4 will likely still happen for a number of reasons: Beyond is still the most successful paramount film this year, the drop in box office could just be a fluke in what has been a bad summer for tent pole franchises, ST 4 could be done a lower budget etc.

The point is, Paramount decides if a movie is profitable, not a bunch of blog sites trying to make a dent in the world of entertainment. Every swingin' dick in the free world can declare Beyond a failure, but all that matters is whether Paramount is satisfied with the end result.

The Internet has been trying to kill theatrical Trek for decades, directly or indirectly, but it's still here. That's what I'm saying.

 

[Khan 2.0]

I also wonder if Beyond was the right movie for the 50th anniversary. There just didn't seem to be anything special about - it's a good movie but maybe not what was needed for this anniversary.

agree. while the movie turned out surprisingly good there didnt seem to be anything 'anniversary' about it - perhaps Orcis more Shatcentric DOFP sounding movie wouldve created more of an event and wouldve been the way to go for the 50th?

 

[urbandefault]

It cracks me up that people can bitch about a 13th movie, on the 50th anniversary, of a canceled 1960s tv show.

I think fans would complain even if tickets were free, and came with a two week all expenses paid cruise on a real starship.

 

[The Wormhole]

Aside from those two, every other franchise has to make very good movies in order to make the bank.

What about Transformers? Those movies are horrible and have a reputation for being horrible. They're always poorly reviewed, both professionally and by regular people. Everyone seems to think they suck, yet each movie still pulls in billions at the box office. And that's with increasing gaps in between the movies.

 

[JeffinOakland]

NO to the Shat

 

[JeffinOakland]

What about Transformers? Those movies are horrible and have a reputation for being horrible. They're always poorly reviewed, both professionally and by regular people. Everyone seems to think they suck, yet each movie still pulls in billions at the box office. And that's with increasing gaps in between the movies.

Ok, that's 3. I just thought of Alien. That's 4

 

[The Wormhole]

Ok, that's 3. I just thought of Alien. That's 4

Alien? That franchise basically ended with Alien Resurrection in 1997, and its immediate predecessor Alien 3 is also considered a low-point for the franchise.

Since 1997, we've had two Alien vs Predator movies, neither of which did spectacularly, a sort of prequel which polarized the audiences but did well enough for a sequel. And we're getting a direct sequel to Aliens which will ignore Alien 3 and Resurrection.

 

[JeffinOakland]

Alien? That franchise basically ended with Alien Resurrection in 1997, and its immediate predecessor Alien 3 is also considered a low-point for the franchise.

Since 1997, we've had two Alien vs Predator movies, neither of which did spectacularly, a sort of prequel which polarized the audiences but did well enough for a sequel. And we're getting a direct sequel to Aliens which will ignore Alien 3 and Resurrection.

Its still a franchise because they are technically Alien movies. All part of the same "universe".

 

[The Wormhole]

Its still a franchise because they are technically Alien movies. All part of the same "universe".

My point is the franchise is not that active, and doesn't pull in that much money.
Alien VS Predator came out seven years after Alien Resurrection and just barely did well enough for a sequel.
Alien VS Predator: Requiem came out three years later and did not do well at all.
Prometheus came out five years later, and did well enough
Alien: Covenant will come out five years after Prometheus
And Neill Blomkamp's Alien movie is coming out the same year, which is thirty-one years after the movie it's a direct sequel to.

 

[JeffinOakland]

My point is the franchise is not that active, and doesn't pull in that much money.
Alien VS Predator came out seven years after Alien Resurrection and just barely did well enough for a sequel.
Alien VS Predator: Requiem came out three years later and did not do well at all.
Prometheus came out five years later, and did well enough
Alien: Covenant will come out five years after Prometheus
And Neill Blomkamp's Alien movie is coming out the same year, which is thirty-one years after the movie it's a direct sequel to.

Alien doesn't really fit into my original point but it ain't dead yet. The original point was that very few franchises can survive and thrive even after "bad" installments.

 

[timtonruben359]

The point is, Paramount decides if a movie is profitable, not a bunch of blog sites trying to make a dent in the world of entertainment. Every swingin' dick in the free world can declare Beyond a failure, but all that matters is whether Paramount is satisfied with the end result.

The Internet has been trying to kill theatrical Trek for decades, directly or indirectly, but it's still here. That's what I'm saying.

No one is saying the franchise is dead, I'm certainly not. Far from it, Trek will be back on TV (where I personally feel it belongs) in January and CBS has already indicated the show is a financial success for them and it hasn't even hit the internet waves yet! There's almost do doubt as long as the stories are good, Discovery will be a hit.

What I am saying that given Beyond's lackluster box office and the fact that it is officially viewed within the industry as a box office disappointment means the current movie franchise is at a crossroads. This is similar to where the movie franchise was after Star Trek V or Insurrection. After Trek V Paramount looked at several options including a Star Trek Academy movie that would have seen a younger Kirk/Spock and McCoy before deciding to do one last movie with the original gang for the 25th anniversary albeit a much lower budget movie that Trek V. Star Trek VI did slightly better business than V but because the budget was half of V's budget, VI made far more money. Star Trek V's budget was around $35 to $50 million in 1988 money and Trek VI's budget was about $25 million in 1991 money.

Similarly, after Insurrection (which did lukewarm business at the box office and just covered it's production costs) Paramount again looked at several options including a totally new cast to take over the movie franchise before it was decided to do another TNG movie (the argument for a TNG movie was that with ENT just launching why introduce yet another crew). For Nemesis they tried to refresh the franchise by bringing in a new writer and director but it didn't work and the TNG movie era ended.

There was no doubt after Nemesis bombed that the movie franchise would be back at some point but it took several years before the decision to just reboot the whole thing and try to turn Trek movies into a big blockbuster and hand the franchise over to a known producer (JJ Abrams) was made.

Beyond is not a failure, it's a disappointment so it's not going to kill the movie franchise but I'm sure Paramount is now thinking what do we do next? It's very possible Trek 4 will go a head as planned just with a lower budget or it might be back to the drawing board for a few years. There will be another Trek movie sooner or later.