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

[Captain of the USS Averof]

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.

Wow! Congrats are in order! So many inaccuracies in one (admittedly long) sentence! Where to start?!

"some people didn't like the marketing for Beyond"
Some people that includes Beyond's both writers (and an actor), one of the biggest (and supportive) Trek sites and industry insiders.

"although the run hasn't been completed" Technically true but by most expectations the worldwide box office won't exceed $370 million. (And that's optimistic).

"the total amount of costs isn't known"
Beyond's budget was $185 million. That's known. The marketing and distribution expenses will make it more not less! At about $275 million to $300 million total.

"profit margin will never be known"
It has been proven by industry insiders that Beyond won't be profitable in cinemas. It could make a profit from other revenues.

"the next film has already been announced"
So has "The Golden Compass 2". How did you find it?

"then I must adhere to the logic that lots of people didn't like Ben-Hur's marketing campaign"
Your use of the word "logic" is most amusing. Who said anything about "Ben Hur"? Each film is a different case. FYI "Ben Hur" was an unnecessary remake of a 57 year old film, in an almost forgotten genre and a bad film in its own right and that's why it failed.

Everything in the last pages of the thread is backed by figures, numbers, direct quotes, outside sources and industry articles. The only "subjective" posts around here are yours.

 

[Jedi_Master]

If 100 people watch something, and 1 person doesn't like it - you can call the reviews of that something "mixed."

"Mixed reviews" is an empty classification, and many commentators have used "poorly received" which is an inaccurate classification in the case of the first Beyond trailer.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Wow! Congrats are in order! So many inaccuracies in one (admittedly long) sentence! Where to start?!

"some people didn't like the marketing for Beyond"
Some people that includes Beyond's both writers (and an actor), one of the biggest (and supportive) Trek sites and industry insiders.

"although the run hasn't been completed" Technically true but by most expectations the worldwide box office won't exceed $370 million. (And that's optimistic).

"the total amount of costs isn't known"
Beyond's budget was $185 million. That's known. The marketing and distribution expenses will make it more not less! At about $275 million to $300 million total.

"profit margin will never be known"
It has been proven by industry insiders that Beyond won't be profitable in cinemas. It could make a profit from other revenues.

"the next film has already been announced"
So has "The Golden Compass 2". How did you find it?

"then I must adhere to the logic that lots of people didn't like Ben-Hur's marketing campaign"
Your use of the word "logic" is most amusing. Who said anything about "Ben Hur"? Each film is a different case. FYI "Ben Hur" was an unnecessary remake of a 57 year old film, in an almost forgotten genre and a bad film in its own right and that's why it failed.

Everything in the last pages of the thread is backed by figures, numbers, direct quotes, outside sources and industry articles. The only "subjective" posts around here are yours.

No one has produced any evidence that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign - at best some have pointed to the fact they didn't "love" one trailer.
Marketing costs are not known for Beyond, so anyone's guess is no more valid than anyone else's and seeing as the qualifier of "disappointing" hinges on the marketing costs, I would consider that to be a pretty important piece of information.
"Industry insiders" are no more authoritative than "sources" for People magazine.
Officially, the next film is to be released, and there are just as many - if not more - examples of films that have been announced and subsequently released than there are of the opposite.
If one film's "disappointing results" can be laid solely on poor marketing and there is "no other logical reason" than what about the rest of the films that actually flopped this season? Ignoring other contributing factors to the less-than-expected box office receipts of Beyond is rather silly.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

No one has produced any evidence that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign - at best some have pointed to the fact they didn't "love" one trailer.

No one produced any evidence that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign because no one claimed that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign. Nice straw man.

Marketing costs are not known for Beyond, so anyone's guess is no more valid than anyone else's and seeing as the qualifier of "disappointing" hinges on the marketing costs, I would consider that to be a pretty important piece of information.

So are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were small which would explain some strange marketing decisions or are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were big which would increase Beyond's expenses even more than the estimated $300 million?

"Industry insiders" are no more authoritative than "sources" for People magazine.

So I guess the professionals whose job it is to write articles for Forbes and Variety are hacks. You are the real authority.

Officially, the next film is to be released, and there are just as many - if not more - examples of films that have been announced and subsequently released than there are of the opposite.

No studio ever announces "officially" it won't produce a sequel. Unofficially it only took Disney 5 years to finally pull the plug from (the announced) "TR3N".

If one film's "disappointing results" can be laid solely on poor marketing and there is "no other logical reason" than what about the rest of the films that actually flopped this season? Ignoring other contributing factors to the less-than-expected box office receipts of Beyond is rather silly.

That's what I'm asking you for the last two pages! What are in your opinion the other contributing factors to the "less-than-expected box office receipts" of Beyond? But I guess it's easier to make fun of other people's opinions as "silly" than state your own.

 

[Jedi_Master]

No one produced any evidence that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign because no one claimed that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign. Nice straw man.

Chuckle. From your post (#481 in this thread)

"some people didn't like the marketing for Beyond"
Some people that includes Beyond's both writers (and an actor), one of the biggest (and supportive) Trek sites and industry insiders.

 

[timtonruben359]

I think Jedi_Master works for Paramount LMAO

 

[Jedi_Master]

You caught me! Nice detective work there, Sherlock.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

No one produced any evidence that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign because no one claimed that Pegg or Lin didn't like the entirety of the Beyond marketing campaign. Nice straw man.



So are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were small which would explain some strange marketing decisions or are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were big which would increase Beyond's expenses even more than the estimated $300 million?



So I guess the professionals whose job it is to write articles for Forbes and Variety are hacks. You are the real authority.



No studio ever announces "officially" it won't produce a sequel. Unofficially it only took Disney 5 years to finally pull the plug from (the announced) "TR3N".



That's what I'm asking you for the last two pages! What are in your opinion the other contributing factors to the "less-than-expected box office receipts" of Beyond? But I guess it's easier to make fun of other people's opinions as "silly" than state your own.

Chuckle. From your post (#481 in this thread)

Is this a joke? From the whole post that's your only response? An out of context quote where I'm replying to you that Pegg and Lin themselves hated the first trailer (which is part of the marketing campaign last time I checked) and were very vocal about it? If you want proof of that here it is:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...itical-of-star-trek-beyond-trailer-justin-lin
http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/...-reaction-to-leaked-star-trek-beyond-trailer/
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Why-Simon-Pegg-Didn-t-Like-Star-Trek-Beyond-Trailer-100667.html
I can find you a dozen more sources that prove they didn't like the first (and most crucial) trailer.

And now I ask you for the second time. Are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were small which explains Beyond's "meager and dilatory" marketing or are you claiming that Beyond's marketing costs were big which would increase Beyond's expenses a lot more than the budgeted $185 million?

I ask you for the fourth time. What are in your opinion the "other contributing factors to the less-than-expected box office receipts" of Beyond? Will you "chuckle" and make fun of other people for the fourth time or are you going to give a real answer this time?

I think Jedi_Master works for Paramount LMAO

They have enough "yes men". That's what brought them to the Ben Hur/Zoolander 2 mess.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Bluray/DVD release has just been confirmed for November 1, with digital downloads becoming available in October.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Let's unpack one point - that Pegg and Lin "didn't like" the first trailer.

That's hooey. None of your links prove that point, and I posted their actual comments in their entirety in an above post.
Before we move on to the other comments, I would posit that the notion that Pegg and Lin didn't like the first trailer is crap. Pure crap.

In addition, @Captain of the USS Averof - YOU were the one who made a clear and unequivocal comment that both of the writers of Beyond did not like "the marketing campaign." Perhaps you made that comment in error? If it was an intentional declarative statement, then it needs to be supported with facts.

As for the numbered questions - the intent of this particular discussion is to focus on the level of effect that the marketing campaign had on the box office receipts for Star Trek Beyond. Before that can happen, we need to clear away some misconceptions, including the fact that certain elements of the marketing were "poorly received" by the MAJORITY of Star Trek fans, and the creative folks behind the film themselves were in disagreement with the marketing campaign, both statements that have been made - rather recently - in this thread and need to be put away for good. In addition, we need to dispense with the notion that the receipts have not allowed the film to "break even" or that we can state with certainty that the film cost as much to market as it did to produce.

Those inaccuracies lead to problems in any discussion of the impact of marketing on Beyond, and I think it is beneficial to clear them away before continuing.

 

[RAMA]

Here's where a lot of your secondary income will be coming from..wow, a huge potential consumer base. I bet CBS Consumer Products has already made a fortune from licensing this alone.

http://worldscreen.com/tvasia/star-trek-licensing-program-arrives-in-china/

NEW YORK: CBS Consumer Products has launched an all-new merchandising slate for the film Star Trek Beyond in China, marking the first-ever licensing program in the territory for the hit franchise.

“This is a major milestone for the franchise and coincides with the Chinese premiere of the latest film installment, Star Trek Beyond, and of the celebration of Star Trek’s 50th anniversary,” said Liz Kalodner, the executive VP and general manager of CBS Consumer Products. “China obviously represents a massive audience and we’re looking to build the brand here in a significant way.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They are seriously promoting the early digital downloads.

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

https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/star-trek-beyond/id1128456722?mt=6&ign-mpt=uo=4

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Let's unpack one point - that Pegg and Lin "didn't like" the first trailer.

That's hooey. None of your links prove that point, and I posted their actual comments in their entirety in an above post.
Before we move on to the other comments, I would posit that the notion that Pegg and Lin didn't like the first trailer is crap. Pure crap.

In addition, @Captain of the USS Averof - YOU were the one who made a clear and unequivocal comment that both of the writers of Beyond did not like "the marketing campaign." Perhaps you made that comment in error? If it was an intentional declarative statement, then it needs to be supported with facts.

As for the numbered questions - the intent of this particular discussion is to focus on the level of effect that the marketing campaign had on the box office receipts for Star Trek Beyond. Before that can happen, we need to clear away some misconceptions, including the fact that certain elements of the marketing were "poorly received" by the MAJORITY of Star Trek fans, and the creative folks behind the film themselves were in disagreement with the marketing campaign, both statements that have been made - rather recently - in this thread and need to be put away for good. In addition, we need to dispense with the notion that the receipts have not allowed the film to "break even" or that we can state with certainty that the film cost as much to market as it did to produce.

Those inaccuracies lead to problems in any discussion of the impact of marketing on Beyond, and I think it is beneficial to clear them away before continuing.

Enough playing around. Here is the video of Simon Pegg's reaction and response (one of many) to the first trailer:

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

No further comments are needed. His face and choice of words says it all.

But let me clarify my position once again. Both writers of the movie didn't like (in my opinion hated) the first trailer. It has been recorded in numerous sites and industry articles. Even your own quotes prove it. And unfortunately for STB, the first trailer is the most important trailer of the marketing campaign.

Now that we've gotten that out of the way I ask you again for the third time. You said, and I quote "Marketing costs are not known for Beyond, so anyone's guess is no more valid than anyone else's and seeing as the qualifier of "disappointing" hinges on the marketing costs". So do you think that Beyond's marketing costs were small, which might explain Beyond's meager and dilatory marketing or do you think that Beyond's marketing costs were big, which would increase Beyond's expenses a lot more and would make it even harder for the studio to make profit in cinemas? It can't be both.

You said and I quote "If one film's "disappointing results" can be laid solely on poor marketing and there is "no other logical reason" than what about the rest of the films that actually flopped this season? Ignoring other contributing factors to the less-than-expected box office receipts of Beyond is rather silly."
Again a straw man. I've already said that each different movie is a different case. No one said that all box office fails can be attributed to marketing. As I've already explained to you Ben Hur was an unnecessary remake of a 57 year old film, in an almost forgotten genre and a bad film and that's why it bombed.

So again I ask you for the fifth time. What in your opinion are the "other logical reasons" and the "other contributing factors to the less-than-expected box office receipts of Beyond"? Will you @Jedi_Master give us one real and honest answer or will you dodge the question once again?

 

[RAMA]

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.

I was offering one explanation, I've offered others. I was trying to give you some credit and not assume you thought I meant ISIS was going to attack movie theaters and such, and I see now maybe I gave you too much credit. Well hindsight they say...

In any case, yes it's a perfectly viable explanation..destabilization in the Middle East often affects the global economy and they actually attacked several countries in Europe which while not impactful in a tactical sense, they leave a sense of regional unease.

Brexit is actually a huge deal in several dozen countries in an immediate sense, impacting both the economy and sense of security of the future in Europe. What's more it's predicted to start affecting more of the world economy including the US as time goes on. If people are hunkering down with their hard earned money in the face of uncertainty they are not going to be spending as much on movies.

As for the other stuff, I've already made my point and supported it, and no amount of ranting will change the facts.

RAMA

 

[Borgminister]

Going to the final showing at the IMAX tonight! Before Beyond Begones!

 

[Khan 2.0]

Enough playing around. Here is the video of Simon Pegg's reaction and response (one of many) to the first trailer:

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

No further comments are needed. His face and choice of words says it all.

Man the look on peggs face at the end there, sheer agony or playing for the camera? Damn that trailer caused all kinds of problems!

 

[timtonruben359]

To add to it, about a week before the movie came out Pegg was telling fans to stop watching the online trailers if they didn't want to know the villain's story line. He was less than enthused about the spoiler laden clips and trailers paramount was dropping.

 

[EndeavourCrew]

Alright everyone let's end this back and forth, hug it out and get EXCITED.........

Beyond is coming November 1st!!!!

Can't wait.

 

[PixelMagic]

Alright everyone let's end this back and forth, hug it out and get EXCITED.........

Beyond is coming November 1st!!!!

Can't wait.

Probably a couple of weeks earlier on digital download.

 

[Borgminister]

Just a quick comment about the movie--and I liked all three installments pretty much equally. But with Beyond, it's kind of odd for Jaylah to have more character building and establishing moments than your main antagonist played by the brilliant Edris buried under a ton of makeup that made him generic. That's where I believe the movie went wrong, as opposed to Cumberbatch, who was there for all his Cumberbitches and chewed the scenery as Khan. Edris was completely wasted in this movie, and only interesting in the brief glimpses as Captain of the Franklin. All other ingredients were perfect though.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

I was offering one explanation, I've offered others. I was trying to give you some credit and not assume you thought I meant ISIS was going to attack movie theaters and such, and I see now maybe I gave you too much credit. Well hindsight they say...

In any case, yes it's a perfectly viable explanation..destabilization in the Middle East often affects the global economy and they actually attacked several countries in Europe which while not impactful in a tactical sense, they leave a sense of regional unease.

Brexit is actually a huge deal in several dozen countries in an immediate sense, impacting both the economy and sense of security of the future in Europe. What's more it's predicted to start affecting more of the world economy including the US as time goes on. If people are hunkering down with their hard earned money in the face of uncertainty they are not going to be spending as much on movies.

As for the other stuff, I've already made my point and supported it, and no amount of ranting will change the facts.

RAMA

Even though I disagree sometimes with you @RAMA it is true that on numerous times you've made your points and tried to back them up with sources and figures. And no I didn't think you actually meant ISIS attacking movie theaters.

As for the global economy and global situation being a factor in Beyond's box office personally I don't buy it as a decisive factor because it didn't stop Suicide Squad and Jason Bourne from earning $680 million and $380 million respectively. The global economy affects all movies released the same. Both movies had a smaller budget than Beyond by the way, although I suspect Suicide Squad had a much bigger (not to mention vastly superior) marketing campaign.