STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I know a lot of you, like me, have been reading other boards as well and the "haters" have been gutting this movie long before it even came out. Anyone who isn't a big Trek fan might have second thoughts about going to the movie after reading all that vitriol. So, is it any wonder that the movie started slow? I'm betting that, like 2009, this movie will have long legs due to good word of mouth.
It could certainly have good legs with the good reviews, and again I think Paramount will take into consideration how tough this summer has been. I think various factors have led to the disappointment, and the worrying thing about the legs is next weekend..
Ahem, France has never been a big Trek market,
However, from Nemesis to '09, Trek has made 1,000% in earnings.
You know WHY Lucasfilm put out Clone Wars, don't you? Not out of the goodness of their hearts.
Lucas and his people understood that it would be a decade between films. They wanted to get that generation of kids hooked on Star Wars.
Nobody at Paramount has that kind of foresight. If they did, they'd have the cast in studios doing audio and doing a decently made, canon, animated series based on the Five Year mission to get people ramped up for the next movie.
Lucas and his people understood that it would be a decade between films. They wanted to get that generation of kids hooked on Star Wars.
Nobody at Paramount has that kind of foresight. If they did, they'd have the cast in studios doing audio and doing a decently made, canon, animated series based on the Five Year mission to get people ramped up for the next movie.
An older fellow (60+) told me just yesterday he hasn't been to see a movie in 9 years at the theater, but he is going to see this Trek movie, but didn't want to fight with opening weekend traffic, I didn't want to face opening weekend traffic either, besides I had already seen the movie online, I will pay to see it this week.
I'm sick of people portraying this as some massive box office bomb. It's number 1, and took in 84M+ over the weekend which is actually where Paramount had originally projected it before they moved the IMAX opening to Wednesday. The problem is the IMAX opening I think was moved too late and that probably affected the numbers.
Yes, the domestic numbers are lower than what I think the studio had hoped for but the international markets are making big gains compared to previous Trek movies. Studios are turning more and more to international markets as domestic box office hasn't been as strong as in the past.
The movie had some cons (no pun intended) going for it. The first movie in 09 was set up to reboot and refresh the franchise, problem is they waited 4 years for the second installment. When you're tying to build up a franchise, 4 years is too long. The second movie should have been out in 2011 or 2012 at the latest. Also, Star Trek is not a mainstream thing as much as Paramount is trying to turn it into one. It's still a bit of a niche market. Finally, why all the secrecy surrounding the villian? Now that the truth is out and we've learned who Harrison really is I've found people around me going cool I'll have to see it now. They should have promoted the heck out of that IMO! The word of mouth seems to be good for the movie and I think that'll keep it standing.
That being said it's a forgone conclusion there will be a third movie. I think it'll be out by 2016 to mark the 50th anniversary. Whether JJ Abrams is involved or they trim the budget a little, we'll see.
Yes, the domestic numbers are lower than what I think the studio had hoped for but the international markets are making big gains compared to previous Trek movies. Studios are turning more and more to international markets as domestic box office hasn't been as strong as in the past.
The movie had some cons (no pun intended) going for it. The first movie in 09 was set up to reboot and refresh the franchise, problem is they waited 4 years for the second installment. When you're tying to build up a franchise, 4 years is too long. The second movie should have been out in 2011 or 2012 at the latest. Also, Star Trek is not a mainstream thing as much as Paramount is trying to turn it into one. It's still a bit of a niche market. Finally, why all the secrecy surrounding the villian? Now that the truth is out and we've learned who Harrison really is I've found people around me going cool I'll have to see it now. They should have promoted the heck out of that IMO! The word of mouth seems to be good for the movie and I think that'll keep it standing.
That being said it's a forgone conclusion there will be a third movie. I think it'll be out by 2016 to mark the 50th anniversary. Whether JJ Abrams is involved or they trim the budget a little, we'll see.
That takes stating the obvious to a whole new level.
We've been saying that for the past week.
The actuals are out for Iron Man 3 ($35,770,094) and The Great Gatsby ($23,939,228). Both went up a little from their estimates. Hopefully the same will be true for STiD.
Edit to add: the actuals for STiD went down from the estimate, but only very slightly: $$70,165,559 for the 3-day weekend and $83,701,981 for the first 4.5 days.
Edit to add: the actuals for STiD went down from the estimate, but only very slightly: $$70,165,559 for the 3-day weekend and $83,701,981 for the first 4.5 days.
Speaking of WOM and it having legs, we treated a hardcore Warsie to the film when we went. Afterward he said he really liked it and, at my prompting, agreed to spread good WOM to his Warsie friends. He also asked about TOS being available on Netfilx claiming he was interested in watching it in its entirety.
I won't be surprised if we can still catch screenings of ID as late as Labor Day!
I won't be surprised if we can still catch screenings of ID as late as Labor Day!
Hmm... I really don't know what to think anymore. I'd love to see STID scrape $500m, my gut instinct is saying anywhere between $400-450m.
Well, if he's expecting TOS to be anything like STID he's gonna be disappointed.
Well, if he's expecting TOS to be anything like STID he's gonna be disappointed.
I disagree.
Yes the effects and sets have received a Hell of an upgrade. But at its core, Star Trek Into Darkness feels the closest to TOS since The Search for Spock.
I do agree with one thing in the Huffington post, between ST09 and STiD what has there been? There has been nothing for four years concerning the new reboot galaxy, no books, no merchandise, no games, no cartoons, no series. If you look for Star Trek on Netflix, you'll get the classic movies and series. Most of the merchandise push has been concerning old Trek.
Yes, CBS fucked it up.