"Except statistically, they are clearly wrong.
RAMA"
I applaud you for providing an objective argument (i.e. one that uses facts rather than opinion) with regards to the biggest September openings. Here is a list of the biggest September openings - and indeed, none are that impressive:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=09
However, the article acknowledges this argument and provides a counterpoint:
"The biggest debut weekend for September is the $48 million opening for
Hotel Transylvania 2. And discounting the month’s top grosser (
Crocodile Dundee from back in 1987, it was a different world), there are four somewhat recent September releases that have earned between $140m and $169m domestic, which is precisely where
Star Trek Beyond ended up anyway. Maybe it would have had a smaller opening weekend. Maybe it would have had shorter legs (kids back in school). But it’s tough to argue that the current result ($165m domestic and $300m-and-counting worldwide) wasn’t close to the worst-case scenario. I would argue that the prime reason for
Star Trek Beyond’s relative underperformance was the fact that it played as a “nothing special” summer release for general audiences. Opening
Star Trek Beyond in September and on the 50th anniversary makes it an event two times over."
At the end of the day, this is a "what if scenario" and as such can only ever be debated, never proved - even with some facts to back up one or the other viewpoint. So your statement that "statistically they are clearly wrong" is not objective, rather it is your subjective opinion. You could well be right Mr RAMA, just as the author of the Forbes and io9 article might be right
