Ugh, I got annoyed with her when she griped about the prosthetics and makeup on Krall and Jaylah during her reactions to the Trek trailers. "Why not use CGI?!" BECAUSE CGI IS OVERUSED, YOU STUPID....ugghghhhghh. Why are we in an age that when film-makers use older techniques, they get bashed for not using CGI?
Why didn't Beyond do better at the Box Office?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
- Status
I don't buy that as the reason.
It got plenty of attention in Australia, with TV ads a month out, the world premiere, a tour by four cast members with numerous TV appearances and newspaper interviews and associated coverage of the Austrek fan club in both major papers in my state,
For all that, it's well down not just on the last two, but far less publicised films.
It's more likely a combination of the mediocre reviews here and general disinterest in the film (I managed to convince one out of 20 colleagues to see it - most were of the 'Ew, Star Trek' mould - and she said she nearly fell asleep four times.
)
There were problems with marketing. I personally liked the first trailer, and it seemed to most go over fine outside some nerdrage, but undoubtedly there was far too long a wait between it and the second. The strategy in general seems to have been a dud, which doesn't mean that it didn't do things right. The social media outreach, and the push before the last two weeks in particular did a decent job, but clearly that wasn't enough. A more dedicated and longer lasting strategy would seem to have been needed. But in the defense of the marketing, it's like that this problem has its roots in the rushed production cycle Beyond went through due to the dissatisfaction with the first iteration. That is a ton of time wasted, and it makes it hard to get everything for the kind of massive campaign that goes into movies like this just right. With the first trailer you could see how rough everything was in comparison to to the finished project, they were definitely struggling with the timetable there.
Beyond is also following the general trends of the franchise, and the year in general. Into Darkness did better overseas than it did at home, and it seems likely that Beyond will also when it's released in places like China. This year hasn't been kind to the traditional summer films in general, and sequels in particular, but Beyond has still done decently, beating records in IMAX, and falling into line with general expectations. It's likely to make money at the end of the day, but as I said in another thread on this subject, if it falls short of what Paramount wants you probably won't see Lin invited back.
Trek 4 is pretty much a guarantee I think. Could be wrong, but ehh I've been wrong before and I probably will be again. Beyond might be considered a misstep in a few ways, but it hasn't been an OMG TOTAL BOMB JJTREK IS DEAD!!1! The next movie will likely have a budget trim, but if it doesn't have to go through the same headaches that Beyond did in pre-production which led to a rushed production, it should also have a more stable ad campaign and make more money. If Paramount goes ahead with it you can guess that the movie's done well enough, and that they recognize where the problems were with Beyond and will work to correct them.
I just hope they bring back those sexy Yorktown uniforms.
Actually those sexy Yorktown everythings.
Beyond is also following the general trends of the franchise, and the year in general. Into Darkness did better overseas than it did at home, and it seems likely that Beyond will also when it's released in places like China. This year hasn't been kind to the traditional summer films in general, and sequels in particular, but Beyond has still done decently, beating records in IMAX, and falling into line with general expectations. It's likely to make money at the end of the day, but as I said in another thread on this subject, if it falls short of what Paramount wants you probably won't see Lin invited back.
Trek 4 is pretty much a guarantee I think. Could be wrong, but ehh I've been wrong before and I probably will be again. Beyond might be considered a misstep in a few ways, but it hasn't been an OMG TOTAL BOMB JJTREK IS DEAD!!1! The next movie will likely have a budget trim, but if it doesn't have to go through the same headaches that Beyond did in pre-production which led to a rushed production, it should also have a more stable ad campaign and make more money. If Paramount goes ahead with it you can guess that the movie's done well enough, and that they recognize where the problems were with Beyond and will work to correct them.
I just hope they bring back those sexy Yorktown uniforms.
Actually those sexy Yorktown everythings.
Lin has moved on.
I am expecting some controversy for this. When Anton Yelchin died, Paramount canceled an event for this film. I feel that the event should have occurred, with it being partly a celebration of Yelchin's life and it being a marketing event for the film. By canceling the event, Paramount did not build on the momentum that was the anticipation for this film. It was a train stopped on its tracks. It never got a full head of steam afterwards as the film was shadowed by the death of one of its stars.
I am expecting some controversy for this. When Anton Yelchin died, Paramount canceled an event for this film. I feel that the event should have occurred, with it being partly a celebration of Yelchin's life and it being a marketing event for the film. By canceling the event, Paramount did not build on the momentum that was the anticipation for this film. It was a train stopped on its tracks. It never got a full head of steam afterwards as the film was shadowed by the death of one of its stars.
Justin Lin just isn't as high profile a director. JJ Abrams had been announced on Star Wars in the months preceding Into Darkenss' release so all eyes were on him last time. I think Beyond was just seen as a non-event by a lot of people and clearly lacked the hype the first two had.
It might be really hard for Trek to ever win back the young audience.
It might be really hard for Trek to ever win back the young audience.
Yes that's a good point. At the time I remember a general feeling that the publicity of him being revealed as the Star Wars director would overshadow STID/make it less of an event, but it probably helped
In terms of bankability, Justin Lin is ranked by "The Numbers" as number 38 out of the 250 most influential people in Hollywood. His work in the Fast and Furious franchise is one of the reasons why he is where he is, and why probably Paramount tapped him for the director's chair.
I first knew Star Trek in the 1970s with the TMP and have been a fan of the series since. I could not tell you the difference between a Trekkie and a Trekker, however, so I am not that hard core. When I see a film, especially in a franchise, I need to know that when I leave the audiotorium that I have seen something that is like what came before and that is not like what came before. The last four Star Trek films have become samey to me, so I do not have the enthusiasm I once had for the films. Seeing this film, it seemed too familiar. Do not get me wrong - I liked the film. However, I have traveled this path many times before - I can see the things that common (for example, like Starfleet officers going bonkers (Garth of Izar, Captain Tracy, Benjamin Finney, etc.)) - and I know where it will go. I did not find anything in it which was disruptive as the father becoming a suicide bomber in ST: ID - I can not reconcile what I believe to be true about humans and what is depicted in the film. I keep looking for an instance in real life where there is analog for what happen in the film. I have not discovered it. So, not having disruptive elements in it, I was able to take the film in as a pleasant diversion.
I am not enthused for the next film, for I see the pattern and I hear there will be time travel. I am like, have we not been down this path before? has not Star Trek explored time travel, especially in the forgettable Star Trek: Enterprise and in the keeping-to-the-status-quo Star Trek; Voyager, which delved into this theme on a frequent basis? And, I am not sure how Star Trek will benefit from Chris Hemsworth. He could not help Ghostbusters and every other film, outside his Marvel ouvre, have not delivered the big bucks.
I first knew Star Trek in the 1970s with the TMP and have been a fan of the series since. I could not tell you the difference between a Trekkie and a Trekker, however, so I am not that hard core. When I see a film, especially in a franchise, I need to know that when I leave the audiotorium that I have seen something that is like what came before and that is not like what came before. The last four Star Trek films have become samey to me, so I do not have the enthusiasm I once had for the films. Seeing this film, it seemed too familiar. Do not get me wrong - I liked the film. However, I have traveled this path many times before - I can see the things that common (for example, like Starfleet officers going bonkers (Garth of Izar, Captain Tracy, Benjamin Finney, etc.)) - and I know where it will go. I did not find anything in it which was disruptive as the father becoming a suicide bomber in ST: ID - I can not reconcile what I believe to be true about humans and what is depicted in the film. I keep looking for an instance in real life where there is analog for what happen in the film. I have not discovered it. So, not having disruptive elements in it, I was able to take the film in as a pleasant diversion.
I am not enthused for the next film, for I see the pattern and I hear there will be time travel. I am like, have we not been down this path before? has not Star Trek explored time travel, especially in the forgettable Star Trek: Enterprise and in the keeping-to-the-status-quo Star Trek; Voyager, which delved into this theme on a frequent basis? And, I am not sure how Star Trek will benefit from Chris Hemsworth. He could not help Ghostbusters and every other film, outside his Marvel ouvre, have not delivered the big bucks.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but until Star Wars, Lin's F&F movies had made more money than any of JJ's.
Ahahaha, sorry, really?
Regarding infrastructure, most of America seriously lacks behind most of Europe. Like, you have strong electric cables just hanging around your backyards?? And watertanks on top of your buildings?
American politics simply often emphasizes other things (arguibly having it's own benefits), mostly being against regulations, which leads to companies both being more innovative sometimes, but also selling the most useless crap overpriced at other times. Most american air-conditioning systems would simply be not allowed in europe for their high energy consumption. That's why americans are still the #1 in CO2-emission per person: People in the rest of the world are exactly (if not more) advanced than people in the US, have the same amount of air-conditioning and cars. American products just are so de-regulated and inefficient, and the infrastructure so bad and public transportation non-existent, that many americans spent much of their time in traffic jams and air conditioning has to run the whole day to work.
If you want to go to the cinema during a heat-wave in Europe, you can have the whole, perfectly air-conditioned theater, with the latest, most modern high-end sound and picture quality system all for yourself alone.
\rant
A bit off-topic, but to give the real answer to your question:
Statistically Europeans tend to spent a larger time outside than Americans, especially during summer. The concept of "summer blockbuster" is rather new here, big budget movies were traditionally released in the winter months, because during that time people spent more time insides (a movie theater qualifies as "inside"). Even untill the 90s we had to wait up until ~6 months till an american blockbuster was released in Europe, to maximize profits during the "movie-going" time of the year. Then the Internet came, and movies needed to be released around the same time worldwide to prevent piracy. That's why all those blockbuster now get released in the summer here too, but to diminishing returns. Basically cinema suddenly had to compete with going to the beach, swimming or barbecue, which it will always loose to when the weather is especially hot. Which leaves a lot of the winter free for european movie productions, that normally wouldn't be able to compete with americans marketing wise.
But now that american summers get too crowded with movies, a lot of releases move to the winter as well. Titanic, Avatar and Star Wars were immensely successfull not just in the States, but also in Europe where they basically "owned" the traditional movie-going part of the year completely on their own. Europe as a whole simply has statistically colder temperatures than the US, and as soon as the heat comes, cinema is basically dead and people go outside instead.
Last edited:
Hemsworth is popular.
Enterprise had lots of good episodes and one of the franchises best seasons ever.
Time travel is popular. If you postulate being able to time travel, and do it many times, and then also postulate it's commonplace in ST's own future, then there really is no problem including time travel stories regularly.
There is no set pattern in the movies. It's just some people trying to find similarities and the natural human inclination to find reasoning and patterns in everything to make sense of events(why we have so many conspiracy theories in the "information age").
Enterprise had lots of good episodes and one of the franchises best seasons ever.
Time travel is popular. If you postulate being able to time travel, and do it many times, and then also postulate it's commonplace in ST's own future, then there really is no problem including time travel stories regularly.
There is no set pattern in the movies. It's just some people trying to find similarities and the natural human inclination to find reasoning and patterns in everything to make sense of events(why we have so many conspiracy theories in the "information age").
Holy shit...not even close. I checked the listings tonight and as of 9:20pm Beyond is no longer screening at the cinema I go to. Fuh.
For this weekend, Beyond is on one screen with four showings (AMC Newport on the Levee). I imagine it will be gone when next Friday rolls around.
Whatever you think of the quality of the first trailer yes there was way too long of a wait between the first and the second trailer with no active promotion in between those two time frames. The standard in Hollywood these days is you have to start actively promoting a film a minimum of six months before its release date - that includes trailers, posters, social media, promotional tie-ins etc. It's not only Paramount's marketing strategy that was dud, but Paramount was acting like Beyond was a dud. Often times when a studio holds back promotion it means they fear they have a bad movie on their hands.
As for Beyond's production schedule affecting promotion, I don't think that honestly think that would an issue. A lot of the big tentpole movies start some form of promotion even a year before the movie comes out. Beyond wrapped production by the end of the summer of 2015 production had been completed almost 6 months by the time the first teaser trailer came out. Previous Star Trek films had much tighter production periods. Most were filmed only months before their release dates (granted before ST09 Trek films were done on a tight budget with more limited special effects).
To given you an idea First Contact began filming in April 1996, wrapped in July 1996 and was released in November of that same year. A teaser trailer was released in early summer while filming was still underway for the movie (so much of the footage was recycled from previous Trek movies and even the TV show). Action figures came out months before the movie debuted posters were up months before etc.
Paramount didn't seem to get the word out enough to the more general audience that there was another Trek movie coming out.
You realize of course that a lot of America's infrastructure was built in the 30s and 50s, while most of Europe's was rebuilt after WWII, so sure there's a lot newer, but generally speaking the US is more modern and efficient than Europe. There is a lot more air conditioning in the US than in Europe, in fact most European countries frown on air conditioning culturally, societally and because Europe is generally cooler. It is more common for air conditioning to be a standard amenity here when renting an apartment or buying a home.
Well yes, there's more public transportation in Europe, but Americans don't consider that a good thing. We have something called "automobiles". Despite the CO2 emissions, a lot of cities in the USA have cleaned up emissions. Smog levels in LA are down more than 70% since the 70s. One of the most interesting things about my trip to Europe and mostly Italy in 1997 was that the Italians had just passed a catalytic converter law, and the highways and cars smelled terrible..no such thing in the US.
I complained about the state of movie theater picture and sound for many years, but theaters in the US have finally modernized, most use 4K (I've never heard or seen one that isn't air conditioned) projection and almost all are converted to digital, and have excellent sound and picture. It takes time to modernize when you have so many.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...love-of-air-conditioning-is-stupid/?tid=sm_fb
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-07-22/americans-air-conditioning-habit-is-eco-friendly
http://www.emagazine.com/earth-talk/smog-levels-lower-in-los-angeles/
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014
https://carboncounter.wordpress.com...d-europe-who-is-taking-the-lead-on-emissions/
By the end of 2012, according to Screen Digest, 91.4% of UK screens had been converted to digital and the rest expected to be so by the middle of 2013.[15] Worldwide progress was slower as in some territories, particularly Latin America and Africa. However almost all screens worldwide were expected to be converted by the end of 2015.[16] [17]
As of 31 March 2015, 38,719 screens (out of a total of 39,789 screens) in the United States have been converted to digital (15,643 of which are 3D capable), 3,007 screens in Canada have been converted (1,382 of which are 3D), and 93,147 screens internationally have been converted (59,350 of which are 3D)
RAMA
Well yes, there's more public transportation in Europe, but Americans don't consider that a good thing. We have something called "automobiles". Despite the CO2 emissions, a lot of cities in the USA have cleaned up emissions. Smog levels in LA are down more than 70% since the 70s. One of the most interesting things about my trip to Europe and mostly Italy in 1997 was that the Italians had just passed a catalytic converter law, and the highways and cars smelled terrible..no such thing in the US.
I complained about the state of movie theater picture and sound for many years, but theaters in the US have finally modernized, most use 4K (I've never heard or seen one that isn't air conditioned) projection and almost all are converted to digital, and have excellent sound and picture. It takes time to modernize when you have so many.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...love-of-air-conditioning-is-stupid/?tid=sm_fb
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-07-22/americans-air-conditioning-habit-is-eco-friendly
http://www.emagazine.com/earth-talk/smog-levels-lower-in-los-angeles/
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014
https://carboncounter.wordpress.com...d-europe-who-is-taking-the-lead-on-emissions/
By the end of 2012, according to Screen Digest, 91.4% of UK screens had been converted to digital and the rest expected to be so by the middle of 2013.[15] Worldwide progress was slower as in some territories, particularly Latin America and Africa. However almost all screens worldwide were expected to be converted by the end of 2015.[16] [17]
As of 31 March 2015, 38,719 screens (out of a total of 39,789 screens) in the United States have been converted to digital (15,643 of which are 3D capable), 3,007 screens in Canada have been converted (1,382 of which are 3D), and 93,147 screens internationally have been converted (59,350 of which are 3D)
RAMA
Paramount messed up this one. I'd love to have a word with their marketing department and then their accountants. "Guys, you screwed up. Not JJ, not Justin. You. You're not cutting the budget when you made the missteps."
Has anyone thought of the release date as being an issue?
Both '09 and Into Darkness were released in May, at the beginning of the summer season. Perhaps what is happening is that the movie-going public are getting weary of the big bang zoom films by mid-summer.
Perhaps Star Trek 4 should be released earlier in the year.
Both '09 and Into Darkness were released in May, at the beginning of the summer season. Perhaps what is happening is that the movie-going public are getting weary of the big bang zoom films by mid-summer.
Perhaps Star Trek 4 should be released earlier in the year.
I've already dis-proven this idea about the first trailer with stats. I posted 4-5 video sources of the trailer, and the only one where the ratio of dislikes was poor (even then it was 60% positive) was on the main video source. All the others were more than 10 to 1 positive for the first Beyond trailer (the one that was nominated for best teaser btw). The main trailer source was the target of a biased attack by Axanar supporters or anti-Jj supporters. Ths proof was posted directly to you in a response I made.
The tv ads appearing 2 months before the movie is a documented fact, and was reported multiple times here on these threads. I can saefly say that before Beyond, I had never seen a non-Super Bowl tv ad for ANY star trek movie before 3-4 weeks.
Marketing and audience awareness were not the problems. Release dates, and casual fans waiting for home viewing sources seems more likely. Maybe the "newness" has worn off and people just want to see it at home. The overall lower numbers for movies this year is so much lower that we may also be seeing a trend where people just want to stream releases they're on the fence about. Trek has always been "niche" and likely always will be.
RAMA
This is something I questioned before the movie came out on the tracking thread here. I now think maybe it had a fairly major impact...maybe not having that bump from 4th of July and Memorial Day was really a problem.
The tv ads appearing 2 months before the movie is a documented fact, and was reported multiple times here on these threads. I can saefly say that before Beyond, I had never seen a non-Super Bowl tv ad for ANY star trek movie before 3-4 weeks.
Marketing and audience awareness were not the problems. Release dates, and casual fans waiting for home viewing sources seems more likely. Maybe the "newness" has worn off and people just want to see it at home. The overall lower numbers for movies this year is so much lower that we may also be seeing a trend where people just want to stream releases they're on the fence about. Trek has always been "niche" and likely always will be.
RAMA
This is something I questioned before the movie came out on the tracking thread here. I now think maybe it had a fairly major impact...maybe not having that bump from 4th of July and Memorial Day was really a problem.
Last edited:
I assume someone has already brought up the idea that maybe INTO DARKNESS's diminishing reputation likely played a part in audiences being less enthusiastic about BEYOND? I mean, if BEYOND came out right after the 2009, it would have likely performed a lot better. Heck, even though I'm not a fan of the 2009 film, I thought BEYOND really served as a better follow up. First film ends with the captain's oath and warping off to their mission and then we catch up with them years into it with BEYOND. In retrospect, it was a very odd choice to have INTO DARKNESS do a lot of backtracking.
Agreed 110%.
Into Darkness seemed partially a response to some of the valid criticism of 09 - mainly the promotion of Kirk, with Pike acting as a substitute for the critics of that particular plot point (that JJ got to, um, kill, while also kinda admitting they were right). This allowed JJ to, once again, follow his hero's journey and mystery box plot lines while Orci got to bring in his 9/12 and Nibaru conspiracy theories. Everyone wins!
I think, overall, you're right though. Beyond would have worked better as a direct follow up to 09 instead of ID. And I didn't mind ID, it was fine sci fi action adventure.
- Status
Similar threads
