20 Things You Didn't Know About ST—TMP (by Harvey)

[BillJ]

I watched the first half, pretty solid, though I knew most of the tidbits. Likely from following @Harvey, @Maurice and others here.

Though I do have a question about the 1.1 billion tickets sold in '79 and 23% of those were for TMP. So TMP was able to sell that number of tickets (230-some million tickets) in the final three weeks of 1979? Or is that from December 7, 1979 to December 7, 1980?

 

[Harvey]

I watched the first half, pretty solid, though I knew most of the tidbits. Likely from following @Harvey, @Maurice and others here.

Though I do have a question about the 1.1 billion tickets sold in '79 and 23% of those were for TMP. So TMP was able to sell that number of tickets (230-some million tickets) in the final three weeks of 1979? Or is that from December 7, 1979 to December 7, 1980?

See my previous reply. Those are stats published in early January 1980 in Daily Variety, and are about tickets sold in the 1979 calendar year.

Although thinking about the numbers a little further, I’m not sure the math works out given what we know about the film’s box office. Hmm...

 

[drt]

See my previous reply. Those are stats published in early January 1980 in Daily Variety, and are about tickets sold in the 1979 calendar year.

Although thinking about the numbers a little further, I’m not sure the math works out given what we know about the film’s box office. Hmm...

It's off by quite a bit: 23% of $2.806 billion is just over $700 million (TMP's domestic haul was around $80m back in the day). I'd buy that 23% of the tickets sold in December 1979 were for TMP, that math probably works out better.

 

[BillJ]

See my previous reply. Those are stats published in early January 1980 in Daily Variety, and are about tickets sold in the 1979 calendar year.

I just wanted to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting what was being said.

 

[Harvey]

Going to have to publish a retraction of that claim.

It’s accurate to what is reported in the previously referenced Daily Variety article—but checking the article again and doing the math, the figures are clearly wrong. My guess is that 23% figure reported by Variety represents the film’s haul of December box office only, not annual box office.

Can’t believe I didn’t catch this earlier! Well, it’s an important lesson about double checking your conclusions, even when you have a primary source backing you up.

 

[drt]

Going to have to publish a retraction of that claim.

It’s accurate to what is reported in the previously referenced Daily Variety article—but checking the article again and doing the math, the figures are clearly wrong. My guess is that 23% figure reported by Variety represents the film’s haul of December box office only, not annual box office.

Can’t believe I didn’t catch this earlier! Well, it’s an important lesson about double checking your conclusions, even when you have a primary source backing you up.

I'm pretty sure about that being the December number, I looked and the other two movies mentioned Kramer v. Kramer and The Jerk were also released that month, while higher grossing movies from earlier in 1979 such as Rocky II and Amityville Horror aren't mentioned.

I'm also not sure The First Star Trek Movie quoted that $2.8B/1.1B ticket number correctly either, looking at the domestic numbers from 1979 they appear to be too high (see https://www.the-numbers.com/market/1979/top-grossing-movies).

 

[BillJ]

Can’t believe I didn’t catch this earlier! Well, it’s an important lesson about double checking your conclusions, even when you have a primary source backing you up.

Nobody’s perfect, and I think your conclusions are more well researched than anyone in the business.

 

[Maurice]

Nobody’s perfect, and I think you’re conclusions are more well researched than anyone in the business.

Yeah, but we hate mistakes on sites like that because they're hard to correct.

 

[mb22]

Does anyone have a subscription to Newspapers.com? It would be good to follow the articles about it's box office from it's premier through the beginning of 1980. I believe there was a 38% drop off in the third weekend. Also, anyone with access to Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and other trade publications could peruse them as well.

 

[Harvey]

I'm also not sure The First Star Trek Movie quoted that $2.8B/1.1B ticket number correctly either, looking at the domestic numbers from 1979 they appear to be too high (see https://www.the-numbers.com/market/1979/top-grossing-movies).

Those figures are what Variety reported at the time, I have a scan of the original article in front of me. The figures at The Numbers only report the top grossers, which would account for some of the difference. It would take a lot of releases on the bottom end of that chart to reach the Variety number, though.

 

[drt]

Those figures are what Variety reported at the time, I have a scan of the original article in front of me. The figures at The Numbers only report the top grossers, which would account for some of the difference. It would take a lot of releases on the bottom end of that chart to reach the Variety number, though.

Yeah, the problem is that list shows the top 69 movies making $1.9B, with #69 grossing $13,000 - generously assuming that every movie #70+ also grossed $13,000 requires 70,000 other movies in 1979 to make up the missing $900 million. That seems like a lot, but I'm not a Hollywood accountant, lol.

 

[Harvey]

The problem is that list shows the top 69 movies making $1.9B, with #69 grossing $13,000 - generously assuming that every movie #70+ also grossed $13,000 requires 70,000 other movies in 1979 to make up the missing $900 million. That seems like a lot, but I'm not a Hollywood accountant, lol.

Definitely. Especially in 1979, when the studio system was in shambles and their release slate was way down.

According to this list on IMDb, there were 3,420 films released in 1979, which falls pretty short of the 70,000 movies required to make up the difference.

It's hard to know if The Numbers is missing some box office data, or if Variety's numbers were off at the time, but it would not surprise me if both were true. However, my area of expertise is clearly not box office scholarship.

 

[drt]

It's hard to know if The Numbers is missing some box office data, or if Variety's numbers were off at the time, but it would not surprise me if both were true. However, my area of expertise is clearly not box office scholarship.

Could be they were including overseas box office, adding that would probably be a lot closer to $2.8B.

 

[Harvey]

Could be they were including overseas box office, adding that would probably be a lot closer to $2.8B.

That would be a good explanation, except the article is only about U.S. box office figures. This is the first sentence (yes, "boxoffice" is one word in Variety-speak):

Theatrical film boxoffice in the United States during 1979 hit an estimated new record peak of $2,806,000,000, give or take 1% or so, confirming a prediction some months ago in Variety.
​

It's a puzzle!

 

[J.T.B.]

I'm pretty sure about that being the December number, I looked and the other two movies mentioned Kramer v. Kramer and The Jerk were also released that month, while higher grossing movies from earlier in 1979 such as Rocky II and Amityville Horror aren't mentioned.

Also, one reason it struck me as odd was I remember Superman playing first-run well into March, it had to be doing some serious box office in calendar '79.

 

[Harvey]

I've sent some corrections in to the editor at What Culture; hopefully, they'll update the article shortly. In the meantime, some updates/corrections...

https://www.facttrek.com/blog/meaculpaculture

 

[Maurice]

I've sent some corrections in to the editor at What Culture; hopefully, they'll update the article shortly. In the meantime, some updates/corrections...

https://www.facttrek.com/blog/meaculpaculture

With BONUS Klingon language parody!

​

 

[inflatabledalek]

That was a fun article. I don't think that photo of the Phase II bridge before, I didn't even know that was one of the sets they'd done test filming on.

 

[Maurice]

That was a fun article. I don't think that photo of the Phase II Star Trek II (TV) bridge before, I didn't even know that was one of the sets they'd done test filming on.

FTYY.

And thanks!

 

[Maab]

I've seen that part 2 video is now online (actually it has been for almost a week).

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

Very interesting and well done, again.

Actually I was hoping to see some of the Memory Wall footage retrieved by startrekhistory.com, as the antibodies attack is explicity mentioned as one of the failure of the entire sequence, but there are only pictures (already available). It’s a pity.