Past experience has shown that, even in times of economic hardship, enough people still go to the cinema to escape their humdrum lives.
$$$ now $$$ later
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
Past experience has shown that, even in times of economic hardship, enough people still go to the cinema to escape their humdrum lives.
It was a smart move to push it back. Paramount needs more time to promote this. Not to mention they would've had to rush (which I'm glad they didn't) to get the movie finished for Christmas. It would've needed to have been done a couple of months ago.
Therin --
You may want to edit your post (if you still can)...mic of orion did not say that about the 'stigma of trek", Jax said that.
[Fixed. - M' ]
Last edited by a moderator:
I think they've done the right thing by moving the movie from a Christmas to a Spring release date. Star Trek has always done better business when released as a summer "Event" movie than when buried away in the winter release schedules.
Star Trek II, for instance, opened on June 4th, at the very heart of 1982's summer release schedule, and then went onto break box office records for it's opening weekend, and went onto finish as the year's sixth highest grossing picture, taking in just north of $79 million (around $200 million in today's money).
Contrast that with the declining fortunes of the Trek movies since they were refocused as medium sized winter releases, a trend that reached its absolute nadir with Nemesis' paltry, faintly embarrassing box office haul of $43 million in 2002 and it's not particularly surprising that Paramount decided to move the sacred cash cow back up to summer blockbuster status.
Star Trek II, for instance, opened on June 4th, at the very heart of 1982's summer release schedule, and then went onto break box office records for it's opening weekend, and went onto finish as the year's sixth highest grossing picture, taking in just north of $79 million (around $200 million in today's money).
Contrast that with the declining fortunes of the Trek movies since they were refocused as medium sized winter releases, a trend that reached its absolute nadir with Nemesis' paltry, faintly embarrassing box office haul of $43 million in 2002 and it's not particularly surprising that Paramount decided to move the sacred cash cow back up to summer blockbuster status.
Well, Paramount blew it in 2002 by releasing Nemesis a week before one of the LoTR films.
It might have been a better idea to release it this holiday season, because as it turns out, there are no 'must see' blockbusters this time. There WAS going to be one of the Harry Potter films, but it was also pushed back to the spring.
I just hope that ST XI doesn't suffer from the heavy competition during the summer movie season.
It might have been a better idea to release it this holiday season, because as it turns out, there are no 'must see' blockbusters this time. There WAS going to be one of the Harry Potter films, but it was also pushed back to the spring.
I just hope that ST XI doesn't suffer from the heavy competition during the summer movie season.
^
^^ There can be an argument made for saying that Nemesis would have failed at the box office even without LotR opening the following week.
^^ There can be an argument made for saying that Nemesis would have failed at the box office even without LotR opening the following week.
Of course, but they sealed its fate by just doing that. If it had opened during a weak scheduling period, it would have made more.
if this new trek movie only makes 250 million it will be perceived by the studio as a flop and we won't be seeing any more trek films in the near future.a film need's to earn double the production budget to be considered a hit by hollywood standards.I predict Star Trek IX could earn 500-550 million USD worldwide, of which 300-320 million on US Box Office alone.
Not a chance sadly, the highest earning TREK Movie never came close to those sort of numbers and never will. The stigma of TREK will stop new fans coming in masses and the fickle nature of the fanbase will stop some actual Trek fans from turning up. Not too mention it will be heavily pirated since alot of SCI FI fans are normally tech savvy so know how to get films off the net.
I think ST will make around $100 million in the US and $150 million worldwide, which would net a small but solid enough profit though the DVD's will be key to paramount making more movies at a slightly smaller budget.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
if this new trek movie only makes 250 million it will be perceived by the studio as a flop and we won't be seeing any more trek films in the near future.a film need's to earn double the production budget to be considered a hit by hollywood standards.I predict Star Trek IX could earn 500-550 million USD worldwide, of which 300-320 million on US Box Office alone.
Not a chance sadly, the highest earning TREK Movie never came close to those sort of numbers and never will. The stigma of TREK will stop new fans coming in masses and the fickle nature of the fanbase will stop some actual Trek fans from turning up. Not too mention it will be heavily pirated since alot of SCI FI fans are normally tech savvy so know how to get films off the net.
I think ST will make around $100 million in the US and $150 million worldwide, which would net a small but solid enough profit though the DVD's will be key to paramount making more movies at a slightly smaller budget.
I agree. this TREK movie isn't being made with a low budget like ALL OTHER STAR TREK MOVIES, except TMP,..this movie is getting the A TREATMENT..and if it fails, then thats it..game over...
Rob
You mean like this?
It's gonna be 2002 all over again, except worse since folks will be watching Wolverine for the 2nd time instead of Star Trek for the first. At least Nemesis had a few days to itself.
And when Trek doesn't do as well as they hoped, they'll blame the fans, the competition, "franchise fatigue," and even the weather, before they'll blame whatever moron decided to put Trek up against X-Men.
The only hope is that the marketing team has decided to invest a little more in this than they usually do.
Yea and these days comic book movies are the in thing and all the x-men movies in the past have done great not to mention Wolverine is the most popular of the X-men. I am kinda nervous about this release date now as if they had released it in Dec as originally planned there would literally be no competition. The worst thing that could happen is it finishes number 2 to Wolverine after Wolverine has already been in theaters for a week. If that happens I expect it to fade into oblivion insanely fast.
number6
Vice Admiral
I'm not nervous in the least. It looks like this summer is going to be a Sci-fi fanboy's wet dream and I find it difficult to believe that any of us is only going to see one film this summer. I think Star Trek is going to be huge! It will generate new interest in the franchise and there will be more. I think the competition is healthy, but not detrimental to the B.O. of the film. Don't forget, it's not just the B.O. It's the overseas and foreign box office, DVD sales, merchendise tie-ins. There are many ways this film can make money and I have no doubt it will. Paramount's moving this to the summer blockbuster season shows a confidence in Star Trek it hasn't had in over a decade.
I don't think it's gonna make Any Difference At All.
Star Trek, if it's as good as has been projected, is gonna make it's money Foremost from US, going to see it Multiple Times (3+), which would happen with either release date.
If it's as good as People-in-the-know are saying, then it will attract Non- and/or Closet-Fans a couple of times also, which will add to the take.
This franchise has always depended on how well the Fanbase likes the final product, with the general public just tagging along if it happens to be Really Good Entertainment.
Everythng is going to depend on how well the story is executed and just how much the Fanbase is willing to accept these radical changes.
And THAT, is something that nobody can really estimate for sure, till May 8th, 2009.
Star Trek, if it's as good as has been projected, is gonna make it's money Foremost from US, going to see it Multiple Times (3+), which would happen with either release date.
If it's as good as People-in-the-know are saying, then it will attract Non- and/or Closet-Fans a couple of times also, which will add to the take.
This franchise has always depended on how well the Fanbase likes the final product, with the general public just tagging along if it happens to be Really Good Entertainment.
Everythng is going to depend on how well the story is executed and just how much the Fanbase is willing to accept these radical changes.
And THAT, is something that nobody can really estimate for sure, till May 8th, 2009.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
Of all the movies coming out at that time, STAR TREK has the most uphill climb...pure and simple. And if all things are equal, and ALL the movies coming out at that same time (Wolvering..Angels Demons) I think TREK will be third in that line...
Most people, non fans, will just assume its another Trek movie but with new actors in place of shatner..and since recent Trek movies, heck you have to go back to 1998 since the last good one, haven't been good recently? Joe Q public will remember that fact if it comes down to WOLVERINE vs TREK...
simple matchmatics...
Rob
*SNIKT!*
I'm sure it will make $0100 000.00
Only because ST XI has the "House Full" signs up.
No, in the USA it was up against "Maid in Manhattan" - and J-Lo won!
I predict Star Trek IX could earn 500-550 million USD worldwide, of which 300-320 million on US Box Office alone.
Not a chance sadly, the highest earning TREK Movie never came close to those sort of numbers and never will. The stigma of TREK will stop new fans coming in masses and the fickle nature of the fanbase will stop some actual Trek fans from turning up. Not too mention it will be heavily pirated since alot of SCI FI fans are normally tech savvy so know how to get films off the net.
I think ST will make around $100 million in the US and $150 million worldwide, which would net a small but solid enough profit though the DVD's will be key to paramount making more movies at a slightly smaller budget.
With a production budget between 120 and 150 million, if the film only did 100 million in US ticket sales (and another 50 million ww) then this film would be a bigger bomb then Nemesis, financially speaking (even though far more people would have seen it).
Since that budget figure doesn't include ad cost and print cost (which will add at least 40 to 80 million more to the cost of the film) we are looking at best case an expense of 160 million (worst probably 210 million which Viacom would be stupid in the extreme to spend).
And that films typically get only 55% of their ticket sales (rest go to the theatre chains, and that percentage is lower for overseas releases).
That means if it generate WW 150 million in ticket sales, that Viacom would get 52.5 million to apply against their expenses. Meaning a loss at the theatres of $77.5 million dollars. That is greater then the short fall Nemesis had after its horrible theatrical run).
That would leave the home market (primarily DVD sales, followed by rental revenue, then either Blueray sales or tv broadcast rights).
Now on this things get really murky. We don't get figures (at least so far with Trek) for overseas home market data either in sales or rentals). On the US front with declining DVD sales (and rentals) a modest hit for a film is bringing in $50 to $75 million in sales. Lets assume out of that Viacom reaps a profit of 60% (higher margin then most products) that would be about $30 to $45 more million to use against its expenses. And I would guess about another $15 to $20 million off all other revenue streams. That would leave (again on the low end of the possible overall budget, marketing and print costs) $117.5 million against its low end expenses of $160 million. Meaning in overseas sales and rentals it would need to generate nearly $43 more to even break even (not counting things like interest on the costs with loans and such, don't even want to go there).
I would say that with your predictions this film would not even break even, and that is considered a flop. Especially with the amount of the investment.
I think on a barebones level the film needs to hit a WW total of $200 million to be a very , very modest success. $250 million would be a okay.
And I think it means we need a $150 million US gross (which is certainly possible. Adjusted for inflation Motion Picture, Voyage Home, and Khan all did more then 150 million, with Search and First contact coming close to those levels) and 50 to 100 million (more would be nice) overseas.
The motion Picture was able to generate 56.7 million overseas (which is adjusted to over 130 million today), but the rest of original trek sucked overseas (with adjusted dollars not ever even passing 40 million).
Modern Trek (not counting Nemesis which performed in few places overseas to poor results) overseas as done better (then all but Motion Picture) with an adjusted income of $55 to 75 million.
So basically as fans (if we want trek to continue in this form) really are hoping for at the very least the adjusted performance level WW of First Contact (that would break the studio roughly even), but we actually are hoping for the WW adjusted performance of Voyage Home or even better Motion Picture.
If we had the adjusted success of motion Picture we would get a sequel.
Last edited:
On the issue of the release date. Both have huge pluses and minuses against.
Minus for December: Out of the 89 films that have grossed over $200 million in the US only 10 have opened in December, none on the day of Christmas itself. The highest grossing film to open on Christmas day only managed a total US box office of $164 million. Out of the 29 films to gross more then $300 million only 4 have been released in December one is of course the highest grossing film of all time and the other three are the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.
The pluses for December, its the 3rd highest month in ticket sales. THough it offers a huge number of releases (to get films able to qualify for academy awards).
Christmas is usually the busiest single week of the year in ticket sales (again spread among a higher number then usual films).
THis December has been very soft. With Potter vacating its spot (something that should have generated between $250 to 310 million in ticket sales) and twilight pushing its date forward (A strong performer that will end with between $175 million to $185. And with the month so far not generating any strong performers (to date) we could have a december with out a single film making even $150 million (and its been years since that happened).
Pluses for May openers: Out of the films to gross over $300 million (29 films) 12 have opened in May. May often has the 2nd busiest week of the year. 4th busiest month of the year in ticket sales (with a lower number of releases),
Cons: The highest opener for the 2nd week of May only had a box office total of $133 million. Stronger competition within the same demo groups.
Minus for December: Out of the 89 films that have grossed over $200 million in the US only 10 have opened in December, none on the day of Christmas itself. The highest grossing film to open on Christmas day only managed a total US box office of $164 million. Out of the 29 films to gross more then $300 million only 4 have been released in December one is of course the highest grossing film of all time and the other three are the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.
The pluses for December, its the 3rd highest month in ticket sales. THough it offers a huge number of releases (to get films able to qualify for academy awards).
Christmas is usually the busiest single week of the year in ticket sales (again spread among a higher number then usual films).
THis December has been very soft. With Potter vacating its spot (something that should have generated between $250 to 310 million in ticket sales) and twilight pushing its date forward (A strong performer that will end with between $175 million to $185. And with the month so far not generating any strong performers (to date) we could have a december with out a single film making even $150 million (and its been years since that happened).
Pluses for May openers: Out of the films to gross over $300 million (29 films) 12 have opened in May. May often has the 2nd busiest week of the year. 4th busiest month of the year in ticket sales (with a lower number of releases),
Cons: The highest opener for the 2nd week of May only had a box office total of $133 million. Stronger competition within the same demo groups.
