Over/Under: Star Trek Into Darkness

[Danger Ace]

J.J. Abrams 2009 "Star Trek" hauled in a total of $385,680,446 worldwide ($257,730,019 domestic + $127,950,427 Foriegn). With that in mind, will "Star Trek Into Darkness" do better or worse business?

Note: numbers courtesy Box Office Mojo

 

[Xaios]

Over, easily, for a number of reasons:

1) Inflation
2) Higher 3D ticket prices
3) It has the good will and momentum generated by ST09, whereas ST09 had to basically start fresh.

 

[Danger Ace]

I voted "over." Despite my fears, I think "Star Trek Into Darkness" will do bigger business than 2009's.

The only thing that could derail this one is competition as it is being sandwiched between "Ironman 3," "Fast and Furious 6," and "Man of Steel."

Release Schedule: Summer 2013

 

[Galileo7]

I voted "over." Despite my fears, I think "Star Trek Into Darkness" will do bigger business than 2009's.

The only thing that could derail this one is competition as it is being sandwiched between "Ironman 3," "Fast and Furious 6," and "Man of Steel."

Release Schedule: Summer 2013

Agree.

 

[BillJ]

Based on the budget and what is being spent on advertising, probably anything under $500 million will be considered a disappointment by Paramount.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

^ I'm really hoping it passes $500m. I guess that would keep things "tickety-boo" and clear the way for an easy and unimpeded course to a third movie. $600m + would be the proverbial cherry on the cake.

 

[Ovation]

With 3-D and increased ticket prices overall, 450 million should be within easy reach and 500 million certainly doable (unless it is a critical disaster--and I mean real film critics, not self-anointed keepers of the holy flame--and gets bad word of mouth among opening weekend viewers).

 

[shapeshifter]

My original prediction on the previous thread was $550-650 million total.

Seems a bit high now but I'll stick with it anyway. Over.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

ST09 was over Unger, while STiD was under Dunn.