STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

Is it me or does it look like the more money STID makes, the more it needs to be a real success?

It just has to be enough of a success to warrant another film, and from what I can tell, it's already done that.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

So no, it's not a "half baked" analysis just because I find it interesting to look at the numbers without China, a country ST09 did not play in, while we are all looking at the international numbers.

Star Trek was released in China in 2009. It made $8.5 million there.

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

So no, it's not a "half baked" analysis just because I find it interesting to look at the numbers without China, a country ST09 did not play in, while we are all looking at the international numbers.

Star Trek was released in China in 2009. It made $8.5 million there.

It wasn't released country-wide the way STID was, IIRC. I think it was just one city, Hong Kong, which was counted just as Hong Kong, not China. I'd have to check on it again.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

It wasn't released country-wide the way STID was, IIRC. I think it was just one city, Hong Kong, which was counted just as Hong Kong, not China. I'd have to check on it again.

No, Hong Kong is counted as a separate release to China. Star Trek made $1.282 million in Hong Kong, separate from the $8.5 million it made in China. Star Trek didn't get as big a release in China as STID did. That's true. But it was released there. The Chinese market has dramatically expanded for Hollywood films since then.

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

It wasn't released country-wide the way STID was, IIRC. I think it was just one city, Hong Kong, which was counted just as Hong Kong, not China. I'd have to check on it again.

No, Hong Kong is counted as a separate release to China. Star Trek made $1.282 million in Hong Kong, separate from the $8.5 million it made in China. Star Trek didn't get as big a release in China as STID did. That's true. But it was released there. The Chinese market has dramatically expanded for Hollywood films since then.

Okay, so I looked it up and yes, there's the 8.5 mil, but I also read that the film wasn't "distributed" in China, and that's why the number is so small. So, I'm not sure if that means that the 8.5 is from sampling the film there or what, just that it didn't have a country-wide release the way STID did.

I guess the point is that if you allow the movie to be seen by more people, then of course it's going to make more money there. Considering the domestic numbers, it's like I said, thank goodness for the country-wide release in China.

 

[Neumann]

The China numbers are about $57 million. If you take that away from the $221 mil that the movie has made overseas and then compare that to the adjusted domestic number for ST09, you get this:

ST09: ~139 mil
STID: ~164 mil

It's an improvement, but without China (and I think there's still Japan and maybe one other country to go for STID, so that number will increase), it's only about $25 mil over the ST09 movie if we're trying to be as fair as possible in the comparisons we can make.

Ok.

What kind of half baked analysis is this one?

Why do you only take China out?

Ah, because, if you paid attention to my first sentence, that pretty much explains why:

"The other thing that I find interesting is the way it looks when you take China out of the equation."

So no, it's not a "half baked" analysis just because I find it interesting to look at the numbers without China, a country ST09 did not play in, while we are all looking at the international numbers.
You're not saying much of anything that I haven't already pointed to in previous posts, which is that the international numbers are, for the most part, better and that the gross number will increase. I think that's all pretty much even in the post you quoted, lol.

"Sorry" for not being able to say anything in my post.

Keep it up.

L O L

 

[Cinema Geekly]

I don't agree with it, I'm just putting it here, DON'T EAT ME.

"It’s a modest success for several reasons. First, it cost almost $190 million to make, and Paramount spent a considerable amount of money on advertising above and beyond the production cost (at least $50 million, by one estimate). Second, not all of that $443 million goes to Paramount – a significant percentage goes to the theaters that show the film (1/3rd to 1/2, depending on what is negotiated and how long the film runs). Finally, while it exceeded the International ticket sales of the first film, it did not have the 2X multiplier against domestic box office that other summer films (like Iron Man 3 or Fast and Furious 6) achieved."

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

Yes, that will surely keep the franchise alive: Taking away the one thing that is saving it.

 

[BillJ]

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

I don't know about you, but I've been dying for a Nemesis sequel!

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

I don't know about you, but I've been dying for a Nemesis sequel!

A Genesis device was aboard Shinzon's ship and in Nemesis 2 we see the RETURN of Shinzon, his head grafted onto Data's body!!

 

[Mr. Adventure]

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

I don't know about you, but I've been dying for a Nemesis sequel!

Wasn't that Star Trek 09?

 

[BillJ]

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

I don't know about you, but I've been dying for a Nemesis sequel!

Wasn't that Star Trek 09?

I meant a direct continuation of that story.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Ok.

What kind of half baked analysis is this one?

Calling it an "analysis" is debasing the term. It's just playing arbitrary games with numbers in order to prove something that ain't so.

 

[sonak]

I don't agree with it, I'm just putting it here, DON'T EAT ME.

"It’s a modest success for several reasons. First, it cost almost $190 million to make, and Paramount spent a considerable amount of money on advertising above and beyond the production cost (at least $50 million, by one estimate). Second, not all of that $443 million goes to Paramount – a significant percentage goes to the theaters that show the film (1/3rd to 1/2, depending on what is negotiated and how long the film runs). Finally, while it exceeded the International ticket sales of the first film, it did not have the 2X multiplier against domestic box office that other summer films (like Iron Man 3 or Fast and Furious 6) achieved."

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

Yes, that will surely keep the franchise alive: Taking away the one thing that is saving it.

silliness or not, big budgets don't make a great movie. TWOK and TUC were shot on small budgets and are two of the best films in the series.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

Yes, that will surely keep the franchise alive: Taking away the one thing that is saving it.

Nah. Did the comments also include the other chestnut? CBS needs to offer money and support to the fanfilm producers, get them all to work together, and start airing their efforts in prime time.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

I don't agree with it, I'm just putting it here, DON'T EAT ME.

"It’s a modest success for several reasons. First, it cost almost $190 million to make, and Paramount spent a considerable amount of money on advertising above and beyond the production cost (at least $50 million, by one estimate). Second, not all of that $443 million goes to Paramount – a significant percentage goes to the theaters that show the film (1/3rd to 1/2, depending on what is negotiated and how long the film runs). Finally, while it exceeded the International ticket sales of the first film, it did not have the 2X multiplier against domestic box office that other summer films (like Iron Man 3 or Fast and Furious 6) achieved."

The worst thing to come out of that article is the comments section. Unreal amounts of silliness in there talking about ditching Bad Robot and doing the next film for 70 million.

Yes, that will surely keep the franchise alive: Taking away the one thing that is saving it.

silliness or not, big budgets don't make a great movie. TWOK and TUC were shot on small budgets and are two of the best films in the series.

No argument there, but as it relates to Trek on the big screen?

The studios have found a system that works for them on the money making end and it doesn't look like lower budgets are coming anytime soon.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

What we need is cheap ass reality science fiction.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I don't know about you, but I've been dying for a Nemesis sequel!

Wasn't that Star Trek 09?

I meant a direct continuation of that story.

And here I was making a snarky comment about Trek 09 and forgot it was technically the sequel in progression.

 

[Opus]

silliness or not, big budgets don't make a great movie. TWOK and TUC were shot on small budgets and are two of the best films in the series.

Those movies were made 20-30 years ago.

 

[Spock/Uhura Fan]

Ok.

What kind of half baked analysis is this one?

Calling it an "analysis" is debasing the term.

No.

It's just playing arbitrary games with numbers in order to prove something that ain't so.

And what would that be?

 

[Nerys Myk]

^Since the last few pages of this thread have centered around folks trying to prove Into Darkness was unsuccessful, I'm going with that.