The Domestic Box Office run is ending, International is kicking in.

[RAMA]

There was a single Super Bowl ad for STID.

Yes, that's the timeline comparison, the events for Beyond outnumber the events for STID. Kind of embarrassing for an article that's statement was a huge marketing difference between the two, only to be wrong.

Beyond started marketing a full 2 months of TV ads for the first time in Trek history. No other film of any era started more than 3-4 weeks ahead of time and all the films only show a high frequency of ads about a week before debut.

Beyond's trailers were roughly a month behind for a movie that came out TWO months later, so in fact, they were ahead of STID's schedule.

I expect STB home video to be in the $50-60 million range. While this is a pittance compared to the nearly $200 million that Star Trek 09 made, it's a VERY good number in the current home video landscape. Given that, I think a final Worldwide result in the mid $300s will put STB in the black. It may not be a big money maker but it should cover it's expenses with a slight profit. And si

Marketing Blitz Thin and Late

Quite simply, Paramount’s marketing campaign for Beyond was meager and dilatory, especially compared to its predecessors.

Beyond’s much-maligned first trailer, which was released in December 2015, came out 221 days before the film’s release date. As we previously reported in a comparison of the marketing timelines of Beyond and Into Darkness, promotion for the film slowly resumed in March 2016 with the release of two major interviews, 10 photos, and two behind-the-scenes videos.

Marketing for Beyond ramped up in late April and throughout May as Paramount released a slew of photos from the film, magazines printed features and interviews, and official signage appeared at the Cannes International Film Festival. Promotion for the film switched into high gear after the debut of the film’s first full trailer on the Paramount lot on May 20th.

Shortly thereafter, posters began to appear in theatres and from late June until July 22nd, Paramount released a series of television spots with new footage. Featurettes and interviews appeared in the July editions of various magazines, and a final trailer was released only three days before the film’s release.

The lull between the first trailer and the second left this website disappointed with the efforts Paramount had exerted in promoting Beyond. We believe the general audience was not aware that a new Star Trek film was coming out in 2016. In contrast, when Paramount was building up anticipation for Star Trek and Into Darkness, they went where no Star Trek film had gone before: the Super Bowl. Advertising during the NFL’s championship game is so expensive because of the sheer number of viewers who tune in, many of whom we would consider to be the general audience who could be intrigued by a Star Trek movie.

For Super Bowl 50, taking place in the franchise’s 50th anniversary year and five months before Beyond’s release, an advertisement for the movie was conspicuously absent. Some may argue that Star Trek and Into Darkness were featured during the Super Bowl because their release was a short three months away. However, Super Bowl 50 featured ads for Independence Day: Resurgence and Jason Bourne, films that were released in late June and late July, respectively. While it is impossible to quantify how this affected the general audience’s interest in Beyond, such a prominent and widely-seen advertisement could only have helped the film at the box office.



So what you're saying (x3 times) is that the trailers were bad… which means marketing was bad… which was what I said.

nce the value of Star Trek for Paramount is in the FRANCHISE rather than the individual picture, I believe they continue with the series and see if they can right the ship.

 

[RAMA]

With the current gross and today's China, Beyond is up to: $296,896,463. When Tuesday's estimates come out It'll be over $297 million, as it'll probably do around $250-300,000 or so in the US.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

There was a single Super Bowl ad for STID.

Yes, that's the timeline comparison, the events for Beyond outnumber the events for STID. Kind of embarrassing for an article that's statement was a huge marketing difference between the two, only to be wrong.

Beyond started marketing a full 2 months of TV ads for the first time in Trek history. No other film of any era started more than 3-4 weeks ahead of time and all the films only show a high frequency of ads about a week before debut.

Beyond's trailers were roughly a month behind for a movie that came out TWO months later, so in fact, they were ahead of STID's schedule.

The article does have one flaw IMO. It examines Beyond's marketing mainly from a quantity prospective and less from a quality prospective.

When the movie's writer/star apologizes for the first trailer, agrees it's bad and swears it doesn't represent the finished movie, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When the final trailer/TV spots show the films big reveal (that Krall is human after all), that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When, by your own admission, the general public and even many fans, don't know that a new movie is out, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When you have a 50th year anniversary and it's never referenced once, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

Everything else is just opinion, including this:

I think there was a general malaise amongst both movie and casual Trek fans this year, and the odd thing is it extended to a lot of foreign countries as well, China in particular. it's possible that ISIS, terrorists, and Brexit have made people wary across the world about the stability of the global economy.

Yeah, well, I'm pretty sure ISIS didn't hurt Beyond's box office much. Although I'm sure they'll be happy to take responsibility for that also!

 

[RAMA]

Actually that's what you call responding to a knee jerking fandom that also watched the trailer a record number of times and was nominated for a Golden trailer Award..which Pegg will probably go accept in person.

BTW I also proved on another thread that out of all the main trailer sources, the only one with a skewed negative reaction vote against the first trailer was the main Paramount one on Youtube...part of a targeted campaign of negativity by the minority of disenchanted(Axanar/Purists..the nobodies). It's a wonder why they didn't do a better job actually, the video was still over 60% positive. All the other videos were positive in 10 to 1 ratio or more.

All this is academic. The floodgates opened on May 20th and Beyond had more marketing than any other Trek movie. Fact.

My favorite trailer of all time was trailer #2.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Watch that and tell me it was a bad marketing campaign.

Trailer #4 was also a favorite.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

RAMA

The article does have one flaw IMO. It examines Beyond's marketing mainly from a quantity prospective and less from a quality prospective.

When the movie's writer/star apologizes for the first trailer, agrees it's bad and swears it doesn't represent the finished movie, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When the final trailer/TV spots show the films big reveal (that Krall is human after all), that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When, by your own admission, the general public and even many fans, don't know that a new movie is out, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

When you have a 50th year anniversary and it's never referenced once, that means the marketing department failed. That's a fact.

Everything else is just opinion, including this:


Yeah, well, I'm pretty sure ISIS didn't hurt Beyond's box office much. Although I'm sure they'll be happy to take responsibility for that also!

 

[Jedi_Master]

I am enjoying the objectivity versus subjectivity discussion.

Objectivity seems to be winning.

 

[PixelMagic]

Bloomberg currently projects a $78 million dollar loss even after home media and tv rights are taken into account...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-got-a-lot-more-disastrous-this-year#media-1

 

[Jedi_Master]

Bloomberg currently projects a $78 million dollar loss even after home media and tv rights are taken into account...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-got-a-lot-more-disastrous-this-year#media-1

Actually the projections were reported on by Bloomberg. They were created by a website called TheNumbers.com and every studio that commented on the website article vigorously denied its conclusions and stated that it had underestimated various projected revenue streams.

 

[Smellmet]

Marketing Blitz Thin and Late

Quite simply, Paramount’s marketing campaign for Beyond was meager and dilatory, especially compared to its predecessors.

Beyond’s much-maligned first trailer, which was released in December 2015, came out 221 days before the film’s release date. As we previously reported in a comparison of the marketing timelines of Beyond and Into Darkness, promotion for the film slowly resumed in March 2016 with the release of two major interviews, 10 photos, and two behind-the-scenes videos.

Marketing for Beyond ramped up in late April and throughout May as Paramount released a slew of photos from the film, magazines printed features and interviews, and official signage appeared at the Cannes International Film Festival. Promotion for the film switched into high gear after the debut of the film’s first full trailer on the Paramount lot on May 20th.

Shortly thereafter, posters began to appear in theatres and from late June until July 22nd, Paramount released a series of television spots with new footage. Featurettes and interviews appeared in the July editions of various magazines, and a final trailer was released only three days before the film’s release.

The lull between the first trailer and the second left this website disappointed with the efforts Paramount had exerted in promoting Beyond. We believe the general audience was not aware that a new Star Trek film was coming out in 2016. In contrast, when Paramount was building up anticipation for Star Trek and Into Darkness, they went where no Star Trek film had gone before: the Super Bowl. Advertising during the NFL’s championship game is so expensive because of the sheer number of viewers who tune in, many of whom we would consider to be the general audience who could be intrigued by a Star Trek movie.

For Super Bowl 50, taking place in the franchise’s 50th anniversary year and five months before Beyond’s release, an advertisement for the movie was conspicuously absent. Some may argue that Star Trek and Into Darkness were featured during the Super Bowl because their release was a short three months away. However, Super Bowl 50 featured ads for Independence Day: Resurgence and Jason Bourne, films that were released in late June and late July, respectively. While it is impossible to quantify how this affected the general audience’s interest in Beyond, such a prominent and widely-seen advertisement could only have helped the film at the box office.



So what you're saying (x3 times) is that the trailers were bad… which means marketing was bad… which was what I said.

It wasn't bad. Just not as good as it could have been in retrospect. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Actually that's what you call responding to a knee jerking fandom that also watched the trailer a record number of times and was nominated for a Golden trailer Award..which Pegg will probably go accept in person.

BTW I also proved on another thread that out of all the main trailer sources, the only one with a skewed negative reaction vote against the first trailer was the main Paramount one on Youtube...part of a targeted campaign of negativity by the minority of disenchanted(Axanar/Purists..the nobodies). It's a wonder why they didn't do a better job actually, the video was still over 60% positive. All the other videos were positive in 10 to 1 ratio or more.

All this is academic. The floodgates opened on May 20th and Beyond had more marketing than any other Trek movie. Fact.

My favorite trailer of all time was trailer #2.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Watch that and tell me it was a bad marketing campaign.

Trailer #4 was also a favorite.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Watch and compare Star Trek Beyond's first trailer and Star Wars: The Force Awakens first trailer. All the answers you need are there.

But for the sake of argument I will agree with you that the 2 trailers above are good. Which makes it what, 2 good trailers out of the 4 released? Of course I'll call that bad marketing campaign.

I am enjoying the objectivity versus subjectivity discussion.

Objectivity seems to be winning.

Why thank you! Although "winning" was never my intention.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Why thank you! Although "winning" was never my intention.

Just in case you were wondering - I think your posts represent "Subjectivity."

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Just in case you were wondering - I think your posts represent "Subjectivity."

Just in case you were wondering - I used the emojicon to show that "I'm joking."

 

[Jedi_Master]

All humor aside the argument that the "marketing was bad because some fans didn't like it, and some fans didn't see enough of it" is incredibly weak, even if the "disappointing" box office receipts are cited as proof of the previous subjective opinion.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

All humor aside the argument that the "marketing was bad because some fans didn't like it, and some fans didn't see enough of it" is incredibly weak, even if the "disappointing" box office receipts are cited as proof of the previous subjective opinion.

Objective or subjective, I don't see any other logical explanation about Beyond's disappointing (no quotation marks needed) box office. Unless you agree with Rama's "ISIS, terrorists and the Brexit" explanation.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Chuckle. If I agree to the logic that "some people didn't like the marketing for Beyond therefore - although the run hasn't been completed, the total amount of costs isn't known, the profit margin will never be known and the next film has already been announced - the film was a box office disappointment", then I must adhere to the logic that lots of people didn't like Ben-Hur's marketing campaign.

 

[timtonruben359]

Chuckle. If I agree to the logic that "some people didn't like the marketing for Beyond therefore - although the run hasn't been completed, the total amount of costs isn't known, the profit margin will never be known and the next film has already been announced - the film was a box office disappointment", then I must adhere to the logic that lots of people didn't like Ben-Hur's marketing campaign.

There is a lot of objective and subjective views here but Forbes, Variety, and Hollywood Reporter all agree that the domestic marketing campaign for Beyond was one of several contributing factors to its ultimate disappointment at the box office.

 

[Jedi_Master]

There is a lot of objective and subjective views here but Forbes, Variety, and Hollywood Reporter all agree that the domestic marketing campaign for Beyond was one of several contributing factors to its ultimate disappointment at the box office.

I do agree that the marketing campaign was a contributor to the lower than expected box office earnings, but the notion that "no other logical" reason can be found for Beyond's "disappointing" returns in a summer full of failures and flops is extremely flawed, as is the notion that the marketing campaign's failure was due to the reactions of a handful of fans to a single trailer.

 

[Phily B]

The long term marketing campaign was shit, especially compared to the last two movies. This film would've opened sub-50m if it wasn't for the marketing blitz in the last month before release, but the damage was done long term. You had that one poorly received trailer and then nothing for months.

 

[timtonruben359]

I do agree that the marketing campaign was a contributor to the lower than expected box office earnings, but the notion that "no other logical" reason can be found for Beyond's "disappointing" returns in a summer full of failures and flops is extremely flawed, as is the notion that the marketing campaign's failure was due to the reactions of a handful of fans to a single trailer.

The fact that Lin and Pegg the writers of the movie came out within a few hours of the first trailer's release and basically trashed it is a big indicator of the negative response it got particularly within the fandom. I will be diplomatic and say at the minimum the reviews for that first trailer were mixed . It was the first Trek trailer in 20 years that actually monetarily made me think I don't want to spend my money to see this.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Stop it. Just stop it. Stop using terms that are broad, subjective and assumptive like "one poorly recieved trailer" and "Lin and Pegg basically trashed [the first trailer]."

Neither are accurate in any way, shape, or form, and both form the basis for a flawed argument that is tiresome to hear repeated.

As has been repeatedly pointed out - a SMALL minority of fans whose identity and numbers CANNOT be confirmed complained about the first trailer, but they were not indicative of any larger trend or attitude.

Lin and Pegg did not "trash" the trailer, rather they responded to the greatly amplified (by repetition and click-bait links) comments of the above SMALL minority of fans, and even then their comments were balanced and muted.

Simon Pegg... from http://comicbook.com/2015/12/18/simon-pegg-didnt-love-the-star-trek-beyond-trailer/

"It was very action-packed," Pegg admitted to HeyUGuys at the European premiere of Star Wars The Force Awakens. "It was surprising. I find it kinda to be the marketing people saying, 'Everyone come see this film, it's full of action and fun.' When there is a lot more to it than that. I didn't love it because I know there is a lot more to the film. There's a lot more story and a lot more character stuff and a lot more of what I would call 'Star Trek stuff.' They've gotta bring a big audience in. They gotta bang the drum. To the Star Trek fans I'd say, hang in there, be patient"

Justin Lin ... from http://www.gamesradar.com/justin-lin-talks-star-trek-beyond/

Director Justin Lin understands where those fans are coming from. Speaking toSlashFilm, he said: "When I saw the teaser, I’m like ‘Aw, s**t. You really have to put the motorcycle in there?’ So I get it, I get it, I get it.

"There were other versions [of the trailer] that were much more traditional and I can see where maybe the hardcore fans could probably see that as, 'Oh'," Lin continued. "But with trailers you’re putting a two-hour movie into a minute and a half, and the one thing I wanted to make sure is that it hopefully represents that we are trying to be bold and take risks; whether we are successful or not, I don’t know."

This self-fulfilling prophecy of a "poorly received trailer" is equine excrement, and it is tiresome to see it repeated over and over and over and then used as a foundation for more arguments.

 

[timtonruben359]

Just because you liked that trailer doesn't mean everyone else loved it and just because I didn't like the trailer doesn't mean everyone else hated it.....but regardless of what planet you live on it was received with mixed reviews that's an undeniable fact.