Star Trek Box Office Thread
- Thread starter Flake
- Start date
cool, nice job. only one complaint. how bout adding the budgets for each film as well?
I just made this in Excel, thought you might like to take a look as well.
The numbers at the bottom are various averages.
Discuss!
trevanian
Rear Admiral
The box office numbers for TMP look very low to me. I recall the worldwide number that David Gerrold vetted back in 82 or 83 was 175 mil gross, not the high 130s that most folks list now.
Also, the costs of the films are definitely low on several.
TMP is at least 44mil; TWOK was supposed to be between 10 and 11 but because of added vfx and overttime for construction it went to 13; TFF came in around 32; GEN was 35 BEFORE the reshoots; INS was 58 BEFORE the reshoots, which probably added 7-10 mil.
Actually, the chart shows that Generations, First Contact, and even Insurrection did rather well.
If you count the overseas take, Nemesis actually made a profit if you're not
counting advertising expenses aswell.
And I don't quite see the logic to excluding specific films from the averages but ok.
counting advertising expenses aswell.
And I don't quite see the logic to excluding specific films from the averages but ok.
What do you mean? Other than Nemesis they all made money. They never would have made 4 TNG movies if it was not profitable for Paramount.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Breakeven on theatrical films takes place after you've done 2.5 to 3 times the cost of your first answer print on average. That doesn't count video or tv.
1982:
5/28: Rocky III (#4, final take: $124.1m)
6/4: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (#6, final take: $78.9m)
6/11: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (#1, final take: $359.1m)
1984:
5/23: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (#3, final take $179.8m)
6/1: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (#9, final take $76.4m)
6/8: Ghostbusters (#2, final take $229.2m); Gremlins (#4, final take $148.1m)
Decent movies hold their own against the competition. Crappy movies don't.
That old chestnut about how NEM failed because it opened a month after Bond and Harry Potter, and five days before Two Towers is just that: an old chestnut. If the movie had been any good, it wouldn't have sunk to the bottom of the charts like a lead turd.
5/28: Rocky III (#4, final take: $124.1m)
6/4: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (#6, final take: $78.9m)
6/11: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (#1, final take: $359.1m)
1984:
5/23: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (#3, final take $179.8m)
6/1: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (#9, final take $76.4m)
6/8: Ghostbusters (#2, final take $229.2m); Gremlins (#4, final take $148.1m)
Decent movies hold their own against the competition. Crappy movies don't.
That old chestnut about how NEM failed because it opened a month after Bond and Harry Potter, and five days before Two Towers is just that: an old chestnut. If the movie had been any good, it wouldn't have sunk to the bottom of the charts like a lead turd.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
By and large I would agree, but there are certainly exceptions, and in that summer of 82, you had huge financial casualties like BLADE RUNNER and THE THING that deserved better fates.
LIkewise, in 89, whether you favor TFF or not, there are other solid movies that failed (at least in the US), like LICENCE TO KILL. ABYSS didn't do so hot either, yet GB 2 made a load of money.
NEM opened at a good time given the beforeNafter competition, so if it had been any good or been perceived to be good, it'd've done better business.
Nemesis is under appreciated.
I like the movie quite a bit.
BURN THE HEATHEN!
(Just kidding. Sorta.)
Similar threads
