Spoilers Picard News & Reviews from Outside Sources

[The Wormhole]

Yeah, the concession stand is where movie theatres make their real money. I know my local theatres throw around all kinds of clever ways to offer discount ticket prices and even free admissions. But there are no breaks with the concession stand. I remember making a joke once, back in 2010 and 2011 the theatre I went to the staff constantly made so many screw-ups they were constantly handing out free movie coupons as compensation (I only paid for four of the eleven movies I saw in those two years combined). At the time I jokingly commented "with all these screw-ups resulting in so many free passes being handed out, how do they even make money?" Everyone who heard me instantly answered "concession stand."

 

[TerryTrek]

If not for Star Trek 2009 and it's commercial success with mass audiences, you wouldn't have Kurtzman streaming Trek on P+.

It was the audience for the Kelvin films that made streaming Trek viable.

The brand was dead prior to 2009, and the Bad Robot/JJ films revitalized it.

 

[fireproof78]

If not for Star Trek 2009 and it's commercial success with mass audiences, you wouldn't have Kurtzman streaming Trek on P+.

Well, I guess we all have to hate Abrams for something, amiright

 

[TerryTrek]

Objectively, Abrams did a fantastic job with Star Trek 2009. It worked for majority audiences and revitalized an unprofitable brand. It made Trek 'cool' and mainstream in a way it had not been since brief periods of the 90s.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, I guess we all have to hate Abrams for something, amiright

 

[KennyB]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[God's Starship]

Chris Pine has voiced similar opinions, they can't spend so much on these new Trek films. They do well but not well enough to justify the budgets, studios chasing Marvel money. If they do ST4 I suspect it'll be a bit more scaled back in scope.

 

[Lord Garth]

If not for Star Trek 2009 and it's commercial success with mass audiences, you wouldn't have Kurtzman streaming Trek on P+.

It was the audience for the Kelvin films that made streaming Trek viable.

The brand was dead prior to 2009, and the Bad Robot/JJ films revitalized it.

Yes. This is exactly why I supported the 2009 Film, despite not being too big of a fan of it. Pine's Kirk still rubs me the wrong way in the first two films. But I knew it could eventually lead to something I'd like better on TV. I never, for one second, thought ENT would be the last Star Trek series ever. And when Netflix acquired all the old series in 2011, I was sure it would only be a matter of time. It was just a question of how, where, and when.

 

[Racefuel]

Chris Pine has voiced similar opinions, they can't spend so much on these new Trek films. They do well but not well enough to justify the budgets, studios chasing Marvel money. If they do ST4 I suspect it'll be a bit more scaled back in scope.

The MCU has been terrible for movies because it changed the bar for what "successful" is.

Before if a movie produced an absolute final net profit of $80 million, it was considered a great success.

Now because you have movies that produce $800 million net profit, anything less than that is seen as a disappointment.

 

[gweeps]

The MCU has been terrible for movies because it changed the bar for what "successful" is.

Before if a movie produced an absolute final net profit of $80 million, it was considered a great success.

Now because you have movies that produce $800 million net profit, anything less than that is seen as a disappointment.

Great there are still movies being made where they don't care as much about profit. The Whale got more of a reaction out of me than any Marvel movie ever has.

 

[Sci]

Yeah, the concession stand is where movie theatres make their real money. I know my local theatres throw around all kinds of clever ways to offer discount ticket prices and even free admissions. But there are no breaks with the concession stand. I remember making a joke once, back in 2010 and 2011 the theatre I went to the staff constantly made so many screw-ups they were constantly handing out free movie coupons as compensation (I only paid for four of the eleven movies I saw in those two years combined). At the time I jokingly commented "with all these screw-ups resulting in so many free passes being handed out, how do they even make money?" Everyone who heard me instantly answered "concession stand."

Just for a glimpse of the economics at play... That giant bag of popcorn you bought cost probably something like maybe $0.15 to produce, if you were to pro-rate the costs of all the materials the cinema purchased in bulk (popcorn machine, oil, popcorn seed, salt, the bags themselves), and I'm probably rounding up quite a bit. When I worked there, IIRC our large popcorn bags cost $7.50. So we're talking a huge profit for each bag.

But. Movie theaters are incredibly expensive buildings to operate, and most of the costs are fixed -- the biggest costs being the rent, the electricity to run the projectors, the cost of the HVAC system to keep the projectors from exploding, the electricity to run the escalators and elevators, periodic maintenance, cost of things like the ovens at the stand. Plus unavoidable, unplanned emergency costs. Oftentimes the only variable cost they have any control over is payroll (so naturally corporate leans on them to cut payroll costs as much as possible, hurting workers). Profit margins end up being very tight -- I don't think we ever made more than a 2% profit. So even though things like popcorn are almost pure profit, the costs of everything else are so high that the concession stand is often only barely keeping the lights on.

And all this was before COVID. I have no idea how the economics of movie theaters are working these days.

 

[The Wormhole]

And all this was before COVID. I have no idea how the economics of movie theaters are working these days.

The lengths my local theatres went to to justify keeping the concession stands open during the pandemic were almost laughable. At first when the theatres firs reopened and the mask mandates were first implemented, they said you had to keep your mask on the whole time, and if you were going to eat your popcorn or drink your pop, only have your mask off long enough to take a bite/sip and then put it back on. Of course, we're talking summer 2020, infection rates where I live were very low at the time (we're talking less than twenty for the whole summer) so this wasn't really much of an issue.

The silliest it got was Christmas 2021, the last great surge of infections. At this point, infection rates were very high and you were required to keep your mask on at all times in the theatre, to the point of actually forbidding snacks inside the theatre. What they wanted was to have everyone eat their snacks in the lobby outside before going into see the movie.

 

[Tuskin38]

I haven't been to a theatre since December 2019.

 

[Sci]

The lengths my local theatres went to to justify keeping the concession stands open during the pandemic were almost laughable. At first when the theatres firs reopened and the mask mandates were first implemented, they said you had to keep your mask on the whole time, and if you were going to eat your popcorn or drink your pop, only have your mask off long enough to take a bite/sip and then put it back on. Of course, we're talking summer 2020, infection rates where I live were very low at the time (we're talking less than twenty for the whole summer) so this wasn't really much of an issue.

The silliest it got was Christmas 2021, the last great surge of infections. At this point, infection rates were very high and you were required to keep your mask on at all times in the theatre, to the point of actually forbidding snacks inside the theatre. What they wanted was to have everyone eat their snacks in the lobby outside before going into see the movie.

I am so glad I got out of the industry before COVID.

 

[NCC-73515]

I only went to see Avatar 2 and PIC S3E1+2

 

[Noname Given]

Inflation-Adjusted Box Office Info:

Star Trek: Generations (1994)
Budget: $71.25 million
Gross: $240.35 million
Profit: $169.10 million
ROI: 337.35%

Star Trek: First Contact
Budget: $87.01 million
Gross: $282.35 million
Profit: $195.34 million
ROI: 324.51%

Star Trek (2009)
Budget: $211.77 million
Gross: $544.50 million
Profit: $332.73 million
ROI: 257.12%

Star Trek Into Darkness
Budget: $245.61 million
Gross: $604.15 million
Profit: $358.55 million
ROI: 245.98%

So...where do Star Trek: Insurrection and Star Trek: Nemesis fall on that list?

 

[mswood]

I mean, how are we measuring "more profitable?" Are we measuring absolute dollars in profit or are we measuring return on investment?

Star Trek: Generations had a budget of $35 million and a total worldwide gross of about $118.07 million. The absolute profit was 83.07 million, and the ROI was 337.35%.

Star Trek: First Contact had a budget of $45 million (corrected) and a total worldwide gross of $146.03 million, for an absolute profit of $101.03 million (corrected) and an ROI of 324.51% (corrected).

Star Trek (2009) had a budget of $150 million, total worldwide gross of $385.68 million, an absolute profit of $235.68 million, and an ROI of 257.12%.

Star Trek Into Darkness had a budget of $190 million, total worldwide gross of $467.37 million, an absolute profit of $277.37 million, and an ROI of 245.98%.

All figures taken from Box Office Mojo.

So the ROI on the TNG movies was higher, but the absolute profits were much higher for the Kelvin films. And when your absolute numbers are that much higher, that matters at least as much as ROI.

Edited to add:

Also, none of these figures are adjusted for inflation.

While you're using material provided by Box Office Mojo and much of that is supplied by studios. These numbers in no way shape or form reflect the data or the point you are trying to make.

Budget does not include thing like marketing, prints, ect. Never has. But those are still very costly factors in the expense of a film. For example the JJ films which opened much larger and hit far larger portions of the planet are going to have very sizable marketing budgets (though we also have venders who will use a popular franchise for advertising purposes that can also seriously help cover a good chunk of that expense). While films that are pre digital typically had far greater "print" costs. And something like Wrath of Khan would have a much smaller print cost versus something like First Contact as Khan at its peak probably only had at best 1000 prints out at one time, while First Contact probably came close to 2000.

Box Office receipts, do not in any way shape of form equal what money the studio makes. Ticket prices are split between the theatre and the studio and the percentage isn't a flat rate fee (certainly not for the last 20 years).

Regional rates vary greatly, as does the period in the run of the release, and the perceived value of the property (A Marvel picture is going to get some of the best rates, for any major release, while a surprise sleeper is going to get a significantly lower cut of the ticket. A ticket sold in the US is going to have larger percent go back to the studio then many overseas locations (China's rate for some films was less then a 1/3rd of what they would get from the US).

And of course depending on the various companies financing the product all have different deals and how they generate revenue. It's not just an % cut based on how much money they invested. That can vary by company, it can vary by region.

As such the average Joe who just follows releases and and public information isn't going to have anywhere near enough data to even make an educated guess on actual revenue returned to the studio.

And that doesn't even touch on how studios use profitable films to underwrite everything else that a study does for accounting purposes.

 

[tenmei]

I haven't been to a theatre since December 2019.

I saw Onward for my birthday just before the Pandemic in March 20, and since then have only seen Suicide Squad, Shang Chi and No Time to Die. I really wanted to see John Wick 4, and I'm hoping to spin up the courage to see Indy 5 and Dead Reckoning soon

 

[Sci]

While you're using material provided by Box Office Mojo and much of that is supplied by studios. These numbers in no way shape or form reflect the data or the point you are trying to make.

Do you have a better set of data to indicate how successful these films were relative to one-another?

 

[Tuskin38]

After giving last week a 9/10, EAS has given episode 9 a 5/10
https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/episodes/pic3.htm#vox