Predict the Rotten Tomatoes & Metacritic score for ST : Beyond
- Thread starter Dales
- Start date
I also sure hope the figure changes. Honestly I lay the blame squarely at STiD.
They had a clean slate after '09 yet they had to go back to the same well.
Wish they had the fresh Beyond as the 2nd movie, it would be so much better.
They had a clean slate after '09 yet they had to go back to the same well.
Wish they had the fresh Beyond as the 2nd movie, it would be so much better.
The number doesn't include sneak peeks or early release numbers. It's opening will probably be $10-15 million higher.
I also think the competition it's facing is the least impressive of the 3 trek movies and the summer has been a bust for live-action blockbusters, so people are really looking for a crowd pleasing adventure.
I also think the competition it's facing is the least impressive of the 3 trek movies and the summer has been a bust for live-action blockbusters, so people are really looking for a crowd pleasing adventure.
Opening weekend predictions DO include Thursday night numbers (which count as Friday for estimates). ST movies have been trending downward and the majority of sequels this year (outside of FD and CA:WS) have done worse than expected.
Given that, I would be happy with a $65-70 million opening weekend. My predictions are:
Domestic: $210-$220m
Overseas: $270-310m
Total: $480-530m
RT score: mid-80s
MC score: mid to high 70s
STB has to get good reviews to obtain this though. If it isn't fresh or has bad WOM, this could easily do XMen Apocalypse numbers. I'd be ecstatic for an opening in the $85-90 range and a final domestic closer to $300 but that is a complete fantasy given the history of the series and lack of any online buzz.
I looked it up and haven't seen anywhere that states the sneak peeks are included.
It's interesting, both predictions for ST09 and STID openings were completely wrong. ST09 was predicted at $50-60 million and STID was predicted at $85-100 million.
It is industry standard. Thursday Preview numbers are added to Friday totals. They always have been. Friday numbers are part of the Weekend estimates. What you are suggesting would be that published box office predictions for the weekend would not be for the soon to be released studio estimates and actuals but be for a number (excluding previews) that each reader would have to calculate individually by taking the weekend totals, finding the preview numbers and subtracting them to find the number you speak of. Does that in any way seem logical?
Go to deadline or any website and you can see the math. Civil War made $38m on Thursday night but only Friday numbers are shown in dailies. Dory made $9m on Thursday night but there are no box office amounts listed for that "Thursday". Previews originated as midnight showings and counted as Friday numbers. Even through the showings have gotten earlier over the years (some even starting as early as 6pm) the numbers are still considered part of Friday's take.
ST09 was conservatively estimated by the Studio at 60M initially. The projection was eventually upped to 65M-75M, so they did turn out to be right.
Considering the current condition of the domestic market, the fact that nuTrek's "newness" has worn off, and the botched first trailer (first impressions are important), I think STB breaking 60M on opening weekend would be pretty good.
What this film needs is universal praise from critics, general audiences, and Trekkers. If it does that, maybe it will have some staying power and generate revenue over a long theatrical run.
This IS the initial projection for Beyond, and as pointed out, they were wrong with ST09.
The current condition of the domestic market is that people are looking for a good movie, and Beyond looks like it's it. Suicide Squad is not a family movie. Bourne isn't.
The first trailer was watched by 40 million+ people. Most people liked it and it got a nomination for best teaser trailer.
$60 million seems quite low right now.
RAMA
Well, anything can happen between now and opening week.
From Box Office Mojo, of the 80 movies that had wide releases in North America in 2016, only 7 had opening weekends above $65m.
(1) Captain America $179m.
(2) Batman v Superman $166m.
(3) Finding Dory $135m.
(4) Deadpool $132m.
(5) Jungle Book $103m.
(6) Zootopia $75m.
(7) X-Men $66m.
From everything we've heard to date, I'm in a positive frame of mind in relation to STB joining that group.
Will it be a crowd pleaser?
Will the critics give it good scores?
Will the more vocal sections of the fan groups generally support it?
So far, it sounds like we'll get to see the Federation in action, maybe get to see some sort of general assembly, see the crew's faith in what the Federation stands for tested.
This interview with Pegg/Jung is awesome but has spoilers.
http://trekmovie.com/2016/06/30/pegg-jung-talk-beyond-with-star-trek-magazine-spoilers/
Pegg further explained, “we liked the idea of exploring the nature of what a mission like that would do to a crew. We thought “let’s make it the same length of time it’s been [between Star Trek and Into Darkness], and send them out into what we call the frontier.” Pegg added, “We get the idea that they’ve been moving around the galaxy, in a variety of directions, and had encounters with many new lifeforms and new civilizations. They’ve got the record for the number of first contacts they’ve made, and the amount of new inductees into the Federation that they’ve managed to court.”
The first trailer? The one roundly criticized as looking like Mad Max or Fast and Furious in space? Most of the people I talked to weren't even sure it was a Star Trek film until the end of the trailer. It was all action and little substance (but look, the Enterprise gets destroyed, that's a new one). They clearly tried to appeal to the general audience before getting back to their roots in subsequent trailers.
This movie can open bigger than $60 million IMO but it will take positive reviews and a big (and effective) marketting push as opening day nears. It's NOT going to do Suicide Squad numbers if Suicide Squad is decent, families are not a driving force in the market anymore. Star Trek doesn't do that well with women or children. Star Trek has a bigger natural audience than a Bourne flick but it's not going to hit the heights of a successful comic book flick (Civil War, Deadpool) or even a largely disappointing big time franchise (Ultron, BvS). While not as front loaded as most comic book movies, Star Trek films do not have good legs so a good opening weekend can make or break the franchise.
There is also a lot of room for growth in Mexico and the South American market as well as Asia internationally. Those regions have been pretty weak for the franchise so far (outside of a decent take from China for STID), hopefully the series will be more recognizable this time around and pump up the overseas box office.
Yup, that one.
http://www.goldentrailer.com/gta17_nominees/
Scrolls down about 1 third of the way and see Best Teaser category.
Not forgetting plenty of room still for growth in China.
I'm expecting the international box office for STB could even be 60% of the overall total.
ST09 was 33% international.
STiD was 51% international.
No one expects this to beat Civil War or Deadpool but mid-$80m is achieveable as the ceiling.
Actually, the last 2 Star Trek films had great legs.
3.4 for ST09 and 3.2 for STiD.
Yeah, go figure..a TEASER TRAILER designed to show you a movie is coming out, not give much detail as it's still deep in post-production with elements that could (and did) change had a lot of action in it's 90 second time frame. 90 seconds do not a movie make. 
Yes, it didn't rate well as the later trailers but statistically still had 2/3rds positive ratings on the main trailer. Not sure where you made up the "roundly criticized" part from, because most people still liked it, and yes got a Golden Trailer nomination for best teaser trailer(because it in fact, did what a teaser is supposed to). The marketing clearly had a segment of the population targeted in it's advertising, the last trailer specifically tried to reach people who didn't watch a lot of Trek and get their interest.
It's interesting you point out the Enterprise is destroyed because that happened in 1984 and 1994..ten years apart. The first time was 32 years ago, the second 22 (and 80 years in-universe time). If you count the Tv shows, that's twice in some 740 odd stories where the enterprise was seen being destroyed. So it's not really that common.
Yes, it didn't rate well as the later trailers but statistically still had 2/3rds positive ratings on the main trailer. Not sure where you made up the "roundly criticized" part from, because most people still liked it, and yes got a Golden Trailer nomination for best teaser trailer(because it in fact, did what a teaser is supposed to). The marketing clearly had a segment of the population targeted in it's advertising, the last trailer specifically tried to reach people who didn't watch a lot of Trek and get their interest.
It's interesting you point out the Enterprise is destroyed because that happened in 1984 and 1994..ten years apart. The first time was 32 years ago, the second 22 (and 80 years in-universe time). If you count the Tv shows, that's twice in some 740 odd stories where the enterprise was seen being destroyed. So it's not really that common.
Yeah, go figure..a TEASER TRAILER designed to show you a movie is coming out, not give much detail as it's still deep in post-production with elements that could (and did) change had a lot of action in it's 90 second time frame. 90 seconds do not a movie make.
Yes, it didn't rate well as the later trailers but statistically still had 2/3rds positive ratings on the main trailer. Not sure where you made up the "roundly criticized" part from, because most people still liked it, and yes got a Golden Trailer nomination for best teaser trailer(because it in fact, did what a teaser is supposed to). The marketing clearly had a segment of the population targeted in it's advertising, the last trailer specifically tried to reach people who didn't watch a lot of Trek and get their interest.
It's interesting you point out the Enterprise is destroyed because that happened in 1984 and 1994..ten years apart. The first time was 32 years ago, the second 22 (and 80 years in-universe time). If you count the Tv shows, that's twice in some 740 odd stories where the enterprise was seen being destroyed. So it's not really that common.
I say roundly criticized because how many directors do interviews where they have to defend a movie trailer the way Justin Lin did???
Sorry, no. Star Trek 2009 had pretty good legs doing a 3.4 multiplier. STID did a 3.2 in a year where the average multiplier of films grossing more than $50 million was just under 3.1. A GREAT multiplier would be in the 3.5-3.8 range. Star Trek movies are somewhat frontloaded due to fanboys so I doubt we can expect better than the low 3's like the first two movies. Especially when you consider that the average multiplier has dropped almost a full point in the last two decades. IMAX and discount Tuesdays have contributed to this phenomenon as has the increase in piracy, less people going to the theater and being more selective in what they do see, etc. Anything above a 3.1 is very good for a movie like Star Trek but huge blockbusters don't typically have good legs because of their big opening weekends. I wouldn't be surprised to see STB hit a 2.8 or 2.9 if it opened closer to $85-90. If it opens in the $65-70 range I would expect closer to the 3.1 or 3.2 range.
