Final Numbers In – Star Trek Breaks Franchise & IMAX Records + Outperforming Batman Begins | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Final Numbers In – Star Trek Breaks Franchise & IMAX Records + Outperforming Batman Begins May 11, 2009

by Rosario T. Calabria , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

We now have the final opening weekend box office numbers for "Star Trek" and the results are quite impressive. Not only did the film out-pace initial expectations, but it even out-performed studio estimates en route to a $79,204,289 opening weekend + $35.5M from foreign box office.  Head on through the jump for extended details and analysis.

 

 

The Thursday night previews for "Star Trek" (from 7:00pm-midnight) generated $4 million.  That spring-boarded into a Friday opening day of $26.89M (including 12:01 screenings), a 1% bump on Saturday to $27.25M and a drop of just 23% to $21.06M on Sunday for what amounts to a Fri-Sat-Sun gross of $75.2M and $79.2M overall when including Thursday night screenings.  That figure more than easily clears initial internal expectations by Paramount Pictures — $50-60M — and thanks to the strong Sunday performance (studio estimates had projected a dip to around $18.3M), it out-performed the studio estimates released on Sunday ($76.5M).  Here’s the daily breakdown with the final actual numbers (via Box Office Mojo):

The fact that the film outperformed the tracking estimates is significant, as is the fact that it managed growth on Saturday –  albeit slight — because that gives us hints that — at least for the time being — it’s playing well with more than just the hardcore fan base.  The same holds true for the film’s Sunday performance.  It had expected to drop in the more common 30% range, but it managed to stave off a huge decline and slid down just under 23%.  One negative that should be noted is that exit data shows the audience makeup was less than desirable for a mainstream hit: 60%/40% male-female, and 65% of the audience was 25 years or older.

Moving back to the numbers, if you focus just on the opening day figure, "Star Trek" more than doubled the previous best for the franchise which was set by "Star Trek: First Contact" in 1996 ($13M.  That holds even when adjusted for inflation: approximately $21.1M).

Sets IMAX Record
While none of the above numbers set any general box office records, there is one figure within the numbers that did just that: its performance in IMAX theaters.  Playing in 138 of the large-screen venues, "Star Trek" set a new opening weekend record of $8.5M, with nearly 11% of its gross attributed to IMAX theaters.  That beats previous record-holder "The Dark Knight" ($6.3M) by nearly a third.

Crushing Franchise Record
So how does this opening weekend relate to past "Star Trek" films? In a word: outstanding.  Unadjusted for inflation, the previous best opening weekend for a "Star Trek" film belonged to 1996′s ‘First Contact’ which grossed $30.72M from 2,812 theaters. 

Many will point out, and correctly, that it’s unfair to judge "Star Trek" solely against unadjusted for inflation numbers.  For that reason, and for a little more perspective, I’ve also put together the following graph charting the performance of all past domestic opening weekends for the franchise adjusted for inflation:

As you can see, not only did "Star Trek" easily best "Star Trek: First Contact" unadjusted for inflation, it also did so when you adjust for inflation.  In fact, the opening weekend performance of "Star Trek" is even more spectacular when you take into account the average opening weekend of all the prior films adjusted for inflation: doubly better at approximately $34.61M.

One last bit of perspective, adjusting for inflation, the last Star Trek film "Nemesis" made $53.4M after its entire domestic run in 2002. JJ Abrams new "Star Trek" has already far exceeded that, probably surpassing it sometime Saturday afternoon.

Performing better than other recent ‘franchise reboots’
Of course Paramount is looking for "Star Trek" to perform as well as other recent ‘franchise reboots’, with "Batman Begins" often cited as an example of how to do it right (with both films also have similar budgets). The good news is that the opening weekend is actually better than the other ‘reboots’ from the last four years. Here is a comparison of the domestic opening weekends for the recent ‘reboots.’

It is worth noting that those numbers are for weekends, like "Star Trek", "Superman Returns" and "Batman Begins" opened early, but both of those films opened on Wednesdays (whereas Trek had half a Thursday). When you combine the early openings, Trek (with $79.2M) comes in second behind "Superman Returns" with $84.6, but still ahead of "Batman Begins" with $72.9M. Box Office Mojo has more on "Star Trek: in their a "Franchise Reboot Battle" page.

Trek still has work to do internationally
News was less than stellar, however, in terms of foreign box office.  Variety best summed it up by saying it did "a solid rather than spectacular $35.5 million" from 54, mostly Trek-friendly, markets.  While it’s true that it still managed a first place finish, it barely out-performed second place finisher "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", which grossed $29.7M in its second weekend.  "Star Trek" was also only first in 23 of those 54 markets it opened in.  (For comparison purposes, ‘Wolverine’ was first in 22 markets worldwide and stands at $253.3M overall ($129.6M domestically). That being said, it’s important to realize that "Star Trek" is doing very well in relation to past films in the franchise, and most importantly is posting similar numbers to past ‘reboots’.  In particular, 2005′s "Batman Begins" grossed $40.7M in its opening weekend overseas and that cume was only higher than "Star Trek" because it played in more markets and screens (73 and 8,000, respectively versus 54 and 5,000 respectively).

In Summary: Trek off to big start – competition on the way
So all in all, "Star Trek" had an impressive opening weekend domestically and while its worldwide performance was OK, but not spectacular. Star Trek is very much on par with comparable reboots in film history.  Tallying in the preliminary foreign box office, "Star Trek" currently stands at $114.7M worldwide. 

Bottom line?  The short-term outlook looks great, but there are still many important indicators to keep a look at, including how it performs in its second weekend with competition coming from "Angels and Demons" and into a very competitive third weekend going up against "Terminator Salvation" and "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian".  Plus foreign box office still has a ways to go, especially in the several key territories that the film has yet to open in such as Japan.

TrekMovie will continue to monitor the performance of "Star Trek".

 

Charts assembled with data from Box Office Mojo


Comments

1. Ignatz Mouse - May 11, 2009

Which version of the Hulk?

2. Daoud - May 11, 2009

I’m sure that JJ can easily take Berman’s stock phrase now… “We’re very pleased.” :)

Great job on all fronts. I say, get out there and see it again this weekend! I’m going to take some friends along, and my son (16) wants to see it again, too.

I’m sure it will continue to exceed expectations. As a matter of fact, it’s fun to see that the “Trade Experts” predicted $50 million, and it’s at $80 million instead. Just a 60% error…. shows what they know.

Who’s going to see it again a few times in these first weeks?

3. Mike - May 11, 2009

Nice! :)

4. Mr. Zoom - May 11, 2009

My co-worker Dan and I are going to see it on Thursday.

5. LT Red Shirt - May 11, 2009

Sweet! Whats next?

6. MC1 Doug - May 11, 2009

Wow! Nice start for the film!

7. saavik001 - May 11, 2009

First of all, good job! I’m sure i’ll see it again.

8. Mathias - May 11, 2009

Hear! Hear!

9. KPC - May 11, 2009

i will be seeing it again.

10. U.F.P., $Version=0 - May 11, 2009

I am going again this weekend . Although I will watch T4 in the theater I will wait a few weeks.

11. Joey - May 11, 2009

I’ve seen it 3 times. I’m sure I’ll see it 7-10 times total while it’s at the box office. I love it more and more each time I see it.

12. Jtrekker - May 11, 2009

Actually, the only movie opening this week that poses a threat is “Angels and Demons”. “Terminator Salvation” and “Night at the Museum” don’t debut until Trek’s THIRD weekend.

13. ThePhaige - May 11, 2009

Heres to the next one and the Blueray…

14. ClassicTrek - May 11, 2009

thank you for this information. its good to see broken down like this with the graphs etc. It was important for me to see how Trek is doing.

Lets hope that it continues the great start.

Greg
UK

15. pizza - May 11, 2009

Seen it Thursday night regular theatre. Then on Sunday in an IMAX theatre. Just a curious note here. The IMAX was for an 11am showing, and the theatre was basically full. As I left, the 1pm lineup looked like another close sell out.

Don’t plan on seeing it again until the DVD comes out. Twice is enough.

Has anyone else noticed the IMDB ratings. Quite impressive. It is now in the top 100 films of all time for ratings at 8.6. So if you want to help that out, get on over there and input your 10′s

16. C.S. Lewis - May 11, 2009

“60%/40% male-female, and 65% of the audience was 25 years or older.”

Now we are in an area of expertise enjoyed by Yours Truly: statistical marketing and strategy. These demographic statistics are probably not as “disappointing” as they seem. It is a well known fact that original fans of the Star Trek are now in their fifties and sixties with adult children of their own. It is further reasonable to assume these fans have a tremendous pent up demand that would, by their sheer numbers, skew the distribution. Removed from the data set however, one would likely see a much younger demographic (including the children of those older fans who might be attending simply or their fathers’ interest). In fact, this motion picture’s audience is probably binodally distributed with peaks clustering ~ 50years and another somewhere around ~17 or so — which was after all the express intent of the producers.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

17. MORN SPEAKS - May 11, 2009

I think a lot of this had to do with marketing, they did a great job in that department. Of course credit goes to JJ as well, for putting out images that were just remarkable.

18. Millennium Vulcan - May 11, 2009

I have seen the movie twice already. I WAS planning on seeing it at least 2 or 3 more times. Unfortunately, I was quite disappointed with film and will not be seeing it in a theatre again.

Hopefully, now that Mr. Lindelof is on board for the sequel, he can give K/O some MUCH needed help with the script.

19. cpelc - May 11, 2009

18 – remember this was filmed during the writer’s strike so some of the things that didn’t work for you might have been changed during filming had they been able to

20. miraclefan - May 11, 2009

I’d feel a little better if it made $90-100 million in it’s opening weekend, but $79 mil ain’t bad either.

21. Kirk, James T. - May 11, 2009

It’s fantastic to hear about the great numbers Trek has made however i think the reason for a disappointing international run is that there’s nothing here in the UK for instants, advertising it!!!

Paramount or whoever is incharge of the advertising in this country needs to do more.

22. Captain Roy Mustang - May 11, 2009

Hmm i beleive tht jj did the impossable bringing star trek at its prime jj if u read this Great job of bringing star trek back on track

23. Sean4000 - May 11, 2009

Sensor sweep shows competition entering this sector. Shields up!

24. oh_hear_ya - May 11, 2009

I hope this movie has legs. I went to an 8:00 PM DLP showing last night and there were 13 people in the theater. Not a good sign for a Sunday night.

25. Jtrekker - May 11, 2009

14. Personally, I have a feeling a large majority of the audience was just north of 25. I bet there were more 25 to 40 year-olds in the audience than anything else. In both of the showings I have attended, that has been the primary audience. The main reason I think this is the case is because most of the audience from the later Trek franchises – beginning with TNG in ’87 – are heading toward the middle age mark, and they are usually more open to the newer Trek offerings. I know I am part of this audience, and I don’t think there is much of the connection with TOS as the audience that is older than 40.

As for the younger audience that Paramount was expecting, well, I think they missed their mark. The only thing the generation below 20 really has to connect them to Star Trek is Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis. Most people would argue that those years were the downhill slide that brought us to where we were 2 years ago – thinking that Star Trek was gone from TV and the big screen. I think that generation just believed that Star Trek was something of the past that their parents liked, but not something they really bought into. Why Paramount worked so hard to get this audience with a less that 30% return makes little sense. I think the marketing department needed a few more focus groups…

26. mooseday - May 11, 2009

Well, I’ve seen in twice, will see it again when I go to the UK on holiday. All the people I’ve seen it with liked to loved it. Also, I know a lot more people going next weekend based on the good word of mouth – even people who I never would have placed in a Trek theatre.

… and I will stay this, it is better the second time …

27. oh_hear_ya - May 11, 2009

#23 Sean4000 – aint that the truth. Marketing brilliance to open this weekend. sandwiched in between some real heavy weights. I don’t think Trek will have another weekend like this last one – but it’s already a hit – there’s no doubt.

28. Devon - May 11, 2009

“I hope this movie has legs. I went to an 8:00 PM DLP showing last night and there were 13 people in the theater. Not a good sign for a Sunday night.”

Nevermind that it made $21 Million on Sunday ;)

For a Sunday Night? When people have to be up for School or Work the next day?

29. AE-35 - May 11, 2009

I did my part… Friday morning at the “normal” theater… then as coincidence would have it I was two hours away from home near an IMAX for Mother’s Day, so squeezed in a bonus viewing there Sunday night… thanks, Mom!

30. oh_hear_ya - May 11, 2009

#28 – Of course – Sunday’s night are a decent night (at least when I worked at a theater they were.)

I saw Batman, The Watchmen at the same theater – same time on a Sunday (that’s my movie night) – and it was good crowds both times.

I’m not saying Sunday is the biggest night – it’s probably 3rd after Sat and Friday – but only 13 people? I was a little shocked was all.

31. Izbot - May 11, 2009

1. Ignatz Mouse –
“Which version of the Hulk?”

The more recent “Incredible Hulk” with Ed Norton, not the earlier “(just plain) Hulk” with Eric Bana (Nero).

32. Capt. Ron_Tracey - May 11, 2009

EAT IT BERMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :p

33. C.S. Lewis - May 11, 2009

25. Jtrekker – May 11, 2009

Interesting observations. I’ve yet to see the picture, waiting for a convenient opening at the local Imax cinema, which proves difficult! I did trek to the box office early Saturday morning, hoping for a no-show to replace my missed Friday reservation. The line was mostly teenagers and young college kids, a few parents scattered here and there with their broods (not unlike the boy from Hawaii’s family). I can see your estimates holding as I am very close to that 40yo mark myself and was probably among the last of my peer cohort to be influenced by Star Trek: TNG was post-graduation and came a very distant second to girls and night-life in my college town residence.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

34. MC1 Doug - May 11, 2009

Hey Anthony, any plans to have comments from the original surviving members’ thoughts on the film?

We already know Nimoy’s thoughts about the film. I don’t think Shatner has (or will) seen it, but I would love to read Nichols’, Koenig’s, Takei’s take on the film.

35. Emotionally Logical - May 11, 2009

If I am not mistaken, TMP and TWoK set records in their respective times for biggest opening weekends.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2585&p=.htm

36. Richard Daystrom - May 11, 2009

16 C.S. Lewis

I am an original fan and will see my 50th this December! I take offense at your comment above.LOL!

37. Hat Rick - May 11, 2009

The article brings forth good news, which I had read — but not in such detail — elsewhere.

However, let us not sit on our laurels. I plan to see this new movie again at least once this week, possibly this evening, and again this weekend.

I love this new Star Trek universe — in more than one sense.

Behold — a new dawn!

Let us redouble our efforts so that the next movie has an even bigger budget than this one.

I’ve been doing my part, telling total strangers as well as friends and family to see this film.

It’s a great day to be a fan of Trek! It’s a great day to be a fan of good movies!

38. screaming satellite - May 11, 2009

yknow – ive never been able to work out just why Trek does so poorly overseas….i mean TOS and TNG was sold all over the world!

and most people know about Kirk, Spock, the Enterprise, ‘beam me up scotty,’ ‘warp speed,’ phasers etc etc just like Luke, Han, The Force, The Falcon etc

and with this film theres no excuse why its doing less than stellar BO…i mean just what *is* it about star trek the forgien market dosnt like??!!

anyway – the new films opening wkend (US) has surpassed Da Vinci Codes opening ($77m)…THE DA VINCI CODE!! think of how hyped and desperate mainstream audiences were to see that and star trek beat it!! (ok i know DVC was summer 06 and 77m is probably something like 85m now but still…)

although theres A&D and T4 coming perhaps Star Trek will do good repeat biz from fans and audiences in general so maybe the 2nd wkend drop off wont be too bad (unlike Wolverine)…plus those people who intially thought ‘star trek?! no thanks!’ might be swayed to see it by all the great reviews and WOM…

im thinking it *should* even out at about $200-250m domestic and *hopefully* about $100m overseas…

its overseas that lets Trek down every time…i mean look at the aforementioned Da Vinci Code…did about $210m domestic…yet $540m overseas!!!! – total = $750m!!!!!!!!

39. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#24—”I went to an 8:00 PM DLP showing last night and there were 13 people in the theater. Not a good sign for a Sunday night.”

Really? On Mother’s Day?

ST09 is not exactly a Mother’s Day movie. I think it’s remarkable that it did so well on Sunday.

40. Marvin the Martian - May 11, 2009

I saw it Friday in IMAX and Sunday in a regular theatre. The IMAX crowd was more jazzed and involved with the movie, but both audiences seemed to like it a lot. It got applause both times.

41. S. John Ross - May 11, 2009

Okay, previously I predicted that opening weekend domestic would no way top $60M (thinking the $50s were the very best we could hope for), and I have been proven seriously wrong on that (though I think comparisons are only fair against other movies that _also_ had a Thursday 7PM opening …) With my prognostication credentials now safely immune from further damage, I’m going to stick my neck out all of a millimeter and once again call it low: Star Trek’s legs will not be very long.

Even adjusting for cynical views of the American moviegoing public (which we see a lot of around here), I think Star Trek is most fairly called a “thrill ride” movie, and thrill ride movies, while they are fun and can impress, lack the muscle to hang on to that bucking summertime bronco. There will be plenty of other expensive, noisy, fast-paced movies streaming into theaters every week or two, enough – I predict – to drop Trek’s numbers by some hefty percentage points on a week-to-week basis.

Me say no legs. Now call me wrong; I was plenty wrong last time, after all :)

42. sebimeyer - May 11, 2009

(tongue firmly planted in cheek) Who knew that Star Trek could make money?

43. oh_hear_ya - May 11, 2009

39. Closettrekker – “Really? On Mother’s Day?”

Really what? Yes really 13 people at a 8:00 pm show and yes really on Mother’s day.

All I am saying is that I thought I would find at least a 1/2 full theater given the hype. Are you saying I was expecting too many people there? I don’t get why people are baffled by my observations.

44. jvaughan - May 11, 2009

I have seen it twice seeing again on thurs at empire leicester sq and again on saturday,it’s brilliant-an amazing job from everyone involved.
Never witnessed so much positive feedback from cinema crowd in years..thanks to the new crew and jj for making me feel like a 10 year old boy again at the cinema!

45. RD - May 11, 2009

#39 Closet, you MUST live in Mayberry. I was out and about around metropolitan LA Sunday all day and night and there were hundreds of people everywhere without their mothers doing all kinds of things that aren’t exactly “Mother’s Day” activities. Heck I did grow up in “Mayberry” and was never tethered to my mother or family all day.

Granted #24 is exhibiting specious reasoning, but by your logic opening a film on Christmas day is a bad move.

46. oh_hear_ya - May 11, 2009

#46 – RD

No #24 is offering an observation and the hope that this film has legs – as in hoping it continues to do well.

What is up with people here? And why is this just a post board and not a real forum – can’t even quotes and replies posts easily. grrrr.

47. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - May 11, 2009

It is now safe to say Trek is Back for good. Im 40 and i have alreay seen it 3 times. Once at the Imax. I will be seeing this agin and agin and again. This movie has so much promiise for the future of Trek. In the next moves we could see everything from the Doomsday machine to veger once aagin. When you look at the reboot the time line does affect the federation and such but things like the Doomsday Machine is very possible as it comes from outside our galaxy as per what Spock said and a trip to the Terran empire universe is still possible. Theres also Gary Mithcell becoming a God like when they get to the Barrier. So with these and im sure theres many more stories that could be done for the next movie now that this trek is makeing all the Dough. Way to go Trek.

48. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - May 11, 2009

Here in Austin Texas on Thursday and Sat evening we had full theaters and the imax was also full. A frend who seen it on Sun said it was packed.

49. Rainbucket - May 11, 2009

Germany’s a pretty big market, and the movie should do very well there.

Just to be safe, the German print has an extra scene with David Hasselhoff.

50. Century - May 11, 2009

I believe this movie will, as you say, have legs… from word of mouth alone. glowing reviews from expert critics aside, i haven’t spoken to a single person (trek fan and non trek fan alike) who hasn’t raved about it.

batman: begins is a great model for comparison, the only difference being the rather shoddy marketing campaign “begins” had compared to the STELLAR domestic campaign for trek. as i recall, batman didn’t open to astronomical numbers (compared to other superhero films, including previous batman installments) but was carried to success mostly through word of mouth and positive reviews. it’s success led to the mammoth success of it’s sequel (as well as heath ledger’s untimely death, of course)… and i feel strongly that if Star Trek 2 X 2 is made as spectacularly as it’s predecessor, we’ll see a monster hit that will, if you’ll pardon the pun, boldly go where no trek film has gone before.

my hopes are high. it’ll be knocked off the top 10 spot next weekend for sure, but i think it’ll still bring in about $45 million fri-sunday.

51. Chain of Command - May 11, 2009

It’s a real shame it took Paramount 10 films to finally get one that’s really successful and accepted by more than just the die-hard fan base. This mainstream acceptance is something Star Trek should have had a as feature film series a LONG TIME AGO. In the past Paramount either:

1. Rushed a film because they set an unrealistic release date (TMP)
2. Cut the budget to the point where the original intent of the writer/director was compromised (Take your pick of which feature to insert into this category).
or
3. Didn’t allow enough development time to create a really GOOD script (Again, take your pick).

Now, after 10 “band-aid/ just getting by” type films (with the exception of a few) we finally get a Star Trek film that shows what can truly be done with this franchise (God, I hate that word).

Paramount, people are glad you finally learned you lesson! It’s just a shame it took you 10 films and almost 30 years to get it right.

52. RD - May 11, 2009

#38, first of all, Trek only made $72 million for a 3 day weekend. With inflation, Da Vinci Code kicked Trek’s butt for the same amount of time. Plus Da Vinci was a book that draws a slightly different audience, a more mainstream audience that does not necessarily run to the theatre on opening weekend and then proceed to watch it over and over again. Also, the Catholic church among others attempted to boycott the movie. My aunt in particular would not go see the movie. Angels & Demons is entering into the frenzy with over 3/4 of a billion dollars behind it. It is going to do just as well as Da Vinci, if not better. Given that, it is unlikely that the mainstream weekend movie going audience will be able to sustain Trek at it’s current level, even if all the Trekkies see the movie 6 more times over next weekend. A&D is a much anticipated sequel which is being marketed aggressively and being made to look equally as exciting as Trek. As happy as I am that Trek has been resuscitated, there is no way it can sustain it’s opening weekend numbers.

53. gatetrek - May 11, 2009

Oh, that’s wonderful news to hear!
I haven’t seen it yet, sadly – though I plan to this weekend! But tell me though – does the movie somewhere (not the end credits!) use the original Alexander Courage fanfare?

54. U.F.P. - May 11, 2009

44 I think prime can compatmentalize his emotions for the death of Amanda because in his reality she has already been dead for m any years. Also prime knows that it may make spock2 uncomfortable because of his less than complete control of his feelings, that sort of thing is considerd quite rude by vulcan standards as I understand them. Also I think it would be counter productive at that point in the movie. Good observation though expect something along those lines in the arc.

55. Xai - May 11, 2009

loved it and will be seeing it again later in the week to see what I missed. I had 4 small problems with it (one being the small whatsit hanging with Scotty), but otherwise had a kick of a time.

56. jmralls2001 - May 11, 2009

That’s the Ed Norton version of Hulk. The one with Eric Bana was just titled “Hulk”. Norton’s was titled “The Incredible Hulk”.

57. U.F.P., $Version=0 - May 11, 2009

44 sorry about my spelling. kindle 2 keyboard is too small for fat fingers .lol

58. jmralls2001 - May 11, 2009

Star Trek is a great movie. I saw it with my dad and we really enjoyed it. I think it might be my best movie theater experience since Batman in 1989 or Batman Returns.

59. Tony Whitehead - May 11, 2009

The Dallas Imax 3pm Sat showing was full and so was the 1pm showing in Waco. Tell a friend!

60. Captain Pike - May 11, 2009

No the film doesn’t use the theme except at the end credits as sop to old school fans. The music was entirely unmemorable and this from the man who did The Incredibles.

61. Aaron - May 11, 2009

I saw it twice last week (once at IMAX and once in 35mm). Going to another IMAX showing again this week.

BTW, I *swear* I saw a difference in one edit in the bar between the 35mm version vs the IMAX version. The scene where Kirk asks Uhura her name has a longer pause in the IMAX version when Kirk tells her something to the fact that she doesn’t deserve to know his name (or something like that)…. anyone else notice this?

62. lukas - May 11, 2009

@15 pizza

“Has anyone else noticed the IMDB ratings. Quite impressive. It is now in the top 100 films of all time for ratings at 8.6. So if you want to help that out, get on over there and input your 10’s”

I noticed that as well. The 8.6 rating should move Trek somewhere in the 30s of the best movies ever. I know that many people are relying on IMDB. Since there are only 24,000 votes so far it’s pretty easy (with our combined trekmovie power) to push it up. Just register and vote. Pretty easy!

63. RD - May 11, 2009

#52. Many of those 10 films were successful and some did very well with mainstream audiences. ST IV was a MASSIVE hit from both an audience attendance and profit standpoint. It grossed $133 million worldwide against a $27 million dollar budget and sold the most overall tickets for the franchise second only to TMP, as well as being the highest grossing weekend of 1986 and fifth highest grossing overall, despite its Thanksgiving release. For ST XI to compete with those numbers, it will have to gross over $788 million during its theatrical run. So to what are you referring exactly?

64. Daoud - May 11, 2009

#52 I don’t get you. And your argument using A&D is better held off until A&D actually debuts. Given that the “trades” underpredicted Star Trek by almost 60%, you really trust their projections on A&D. I couldn’t have cared less about The Da Vinci Code… but even if I had, what exactly does A&D do that DaV didn’t already do?

Plus, check your math. The article above points out for the 3-day weekend, Star Trek just made $75,204,289 over the 3 days. That excludes the 4 million from Thursday, so where does your lowball $72 million come from?

Why the constant negativity? Nimoy’s word ringing in your ears or something?

65. RD - May 11, 2009

#60, I would point out that John Barry was for all intents and purposes the composer for the Incredibles. He’s an “old school” guy who wrote the James Bond theme and music for many of the films. Giacchino’s Incredibles’ score, though extremely well done, is little more than a rip-off of Barry’s style for that genre. I too share your dissatisfaction with the quality of this Trek score and from Giacchino in general whom I have come to otherwise think highly of …

66. U.F.P., $Version=0, $Version=0 - May 11, 2009

i watched Ironman twice @ the theater. It was not as marketed as trek but did well with word of mouth and great reviews. I think we will see similar response to this movie IMHO.

67. Ian - May 11, 2009

Very happy to see Trek pulling these kind of numbers! What a way to reboot the franchise!

68. SPOCKBOY - May 11, 2009

EXCELLENT NEWS!
I loved the new movie, but I sincerely hope that in the next installment the story focuses on our heroes just saving their “own” asses instead of whole planets or the universe. Franchise’s tend to get greedy after their initial success and create bigger and bigger stories (ie-James Bond, Doctor Who, Superman) until the believability goes out the window and the characters get lost in the scope of the so called BIG story. In the 1970’s, Superman (comic version) was tossing planets like marbles! Unfortunately we lowly humans cannot relate to such strength, and it’s impossible to create any serious drama for such a powerful figure, so where do you go from there?

I really enjoyed the movie however and look forward to more.
: )

69. RD - May 11, 2009

#64, what’s with the unbridled optimism? I’m glad you don’t get me. I happen to have liked the Da Vinci Code and A&D. AND SO DID a lot of the so-called general mass-audience. For DVC, to the tune of 3/4 of a BILLION DOLLARS! I’m not buying into anybody’s hype, I’m looking at the raw evidence. DVC is a phenomenon at the box office and even if A&D fails to match it, it will still succeed beyond most films wildest expectations.

As for my math, I chose not to take my facts via the rose colored glasses of the trekmovie articles. Try a legitimate source: Variety lists the 3-day take at $72.2 million. Here’s a link.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118003479.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

Please leave your personal feelings at home and try to present an objective argument based on some facts

70. OlderFan - May 11, 2009

Well I’m hopeful and encouraged… Trek is reaching some of the least likely non-fans:

I’m 49 and expected to head out the door alone to see the movie tonight at our local IMAX. Instead, BOTH my 18 yo daughter and 14 yo daughter stopped me and said “Wait! We heard it’s really cool and want to go with you. Wait til Wednesday when we can go together!”

It may be the last time they want to do anything in public with their “geek/nerd” dad so waiting for Wednesday now…

71. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

Where are all the haters from before who predicted doom and gloom for this movie. Huh? Where are y’all? Don’t you have more to say?

72. sean - May 11, 2009

I saw the film in IMAX on Sunday and the theatre was absolutely packed with people of all ages. They cheered, laughed and finally applauded after Nimoy’s ‘These are the voyages…’ voiceover. And the IMAX here is only $2 more than the regular theatre, so it wasn’t just hardcore fans coming out.

As for Angels & Demons – it’s a much better story than the Da Vinci Code, but people are STILL talking about how bad DVC was. I’m not entirely sure of how well A&D will really do. Then again, both National Treasure films were real piles that inexplicably did well at the BO, and DVC is essentially National Treasure with religious references substituted for historical ones (with neither being terribly accurate).

73. U.F.P., $Version=0, $Version=0, $Version=0 - May 11, 2009

69 Shouldn’t you be posting your op/ed on the DVC AD website? I’m here to discuss Trek( not that my posts appear to interest anyone)

74. Unbel1ever - May 11, 2009

#71

Can’t remember anyone, who wrote that the movie would fail. Many people said, it would not be a good Star Trek movie. There’s a difference.

75. Shat Hands - May 11, 2009

I don’t care how many people pay to see it.

It’s still MY Star Trek!

Much love to all

76. Devon - May 11, 2009

74 – “Many people said, it would not be a good Star Trek movie. ‘

Thankfully they were wrong ;)

77. 750 Mang - May 11, 2009

io9.com has a short but nice interview with the writers.

They describe the would-be Shatner scene in detail. I’m not one who likes gimmicky cameos, but it sounds like the Old Kirk bit was kind of nice. I’m not saying the movie suffered because it wasn’t in there, but it sounds sweet.

Orci says in the interview, “I still liked it.” I do too Bob.

Here’s the link… http://io9.com/5249752/the-shatner-scene-you-never-saw-in-abrams-star-trek

78. Julio - May 11, 2009

I read Orci’s explanation of the Shatner scene he had in mind, and I agree with their decision to leave it out. It sounded too “forced” to me, personally.

79. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#74—I remember plenty of both here over the last two years.

80. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#78—Agreed. I appreciate the fanboyism, but I’m glad that it was ultimately kept in check there.

81. RD - May 11, 2009

#72, Sean, you are inadvertently making my point for me with your argument: (paraphrasing) ST XI is a great movie and did weill, but DVC & Nat’L Treasures sucked, but did inexplicably well.

So, the mass audience that has finally put ST into Summer Blockbuster territory has no taste as evidence by the $750 million plus DVC earned, not to mention the Nat’l Treasure movies? LOL

And who are these “people” who are still talking about how DVC sucked? Are they your friends who also share your views that the Nat’l treasure films were crap? Clearly you and the people that are saying it sucked were not part of the 3/4 of a Billion dollar ticket sales in 2006. Clearly word of mouth from all those people who hated it had no effect on the box office.

So you’re saying that after 3 years, people have rethought their feelings about it and won’t be tricked into seeing Angels & Demons, despite it being a number one best-seller and being marketed as thrill ride in addition?

Please! There is more to life than Star Trek and while I am pleased the franchise has done so well, the fans should count their blessings and be realistic about the films possibilities in the face of other extremely strong franchises in the next couple of weeks. Hopefully optimistic, not ridiculously unrealistic. Even Rosario urges cautious optimism.

82. The Governator - May 11, 2009

77. 750 Mang

At first, I wondered why they left it out, because it seemed like it would have been a really cool scene, but then i started thinking, and it would have really put a damper on the emotionally impact on having the two Spocks meet. Having it interupted by the Shat would have been kind of forced. Still, brilliant idea.

Oh, and I wish I could have seen the scene with Spock playing the lute!

And I still want to know how that rura penthe scene plays out. GRRR!!!

83. Darryl - May 11, 2009

I’ve seen it twice so far, hope to get to my local Imax theater this week for a third helping. :)

84. Nick - May 11, 2009

Not to be a buzzkill, but the proper spelling is “outperforming” not “outpeforming.”

85. 750 Mang - May 11, 2009

I get it.

I’m just saying I think their idea was kinda nice and might have worked.

But I totally get why it’s not there and think it’s fine without it. Besides, The Shat probably wouldn’t have done such small cameo appearance.

I wonder if it’s in the novelization?

86. U.F.P. - May 11, 2009

I hope in angels and demons they leave in the scene where he jumps out of the helicopter with his jacket for a parachute and survives. now thats entertainm ent with legs…

87. Scott Gammans - May 11, 2009

For what it’s worth, I just got back from the 7:15 PM IMAX show at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum Annex in Northern Virginia. Good thing I bought my ticket online–the show sold out!

88. Oktoberfest - May 11, 2009

How did The Court do this?

Trek 1.0 opens during the worst global recession in decades, yet it succeeds beyond our wildest expectations?

I’m pretty sure that JJ is Da Vinci. And Brahms, and a hundred other names we do not know…

89. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

Still waiting…..

I especially want to hear from Databrain. He was damn entertaining.

90. Eric Holloway - May 11, 2009

I bet all those IMAX theaters that aren’t showing Star Trek are now kicking themselves, especially, as #88 pointed out, in these difficult economic times.

91. Edwin - May 11, 2009

I must admit, as a diehard, I thought this movie was going to suck big time…. but I have to say ….. I loved it!!!!!

It wiped away the stench of Berman Trek and brought us firmly back to the original series!

Thank you JJ, Bob, Alex and the rest of the team

92. Ultimate Trekker - May 11, 2009

It’s days like this that make me proud to be a trekker. I never gave up… even after Nemesis, even after Enterprise. Whenever people have a longing for hope and optimism, they will turn to star trek. And that time is now… now more than ever.

long live STAR TREK

93. somethoughts - May 11, 2009

I’ve seen it 3 times already and each time with different friends, those friends also saw it again with different friends, co workers who didn’t plan to see it will see it based on my feedback. I still haven’t taken my little cousins, you know i’m craving another viewing. I love the theme enterprising young men that plays during the star trek logo and when Jim and Bones sees the Enterprise in space for the first time. There are too many favourite parts to list, another one that comes to mind is when he’s getting lectured by Pike in the bar and plays with the salt shaker and the music in the background, gazing upon the enterprise like how Luke gazed upon the sky in A New Hope with epic score in background, you can tell I like this movie…btw I’m sure Michael G. will win some sort of award for his music composition.

94. sean - May 11, 2009

#81

I’m not sure what point you think I was making or what your point was to begin with. I wasn’t arguing with you. Only questioning whether A&D will be the blockbuster the studio thinks it will be. DVC was disappointing, and that’s putting it mildly from someone who was very, very excited to see it. I’m excited to see A&D too, but I haven’t heard many others saying the same. And no, I’m not going simply by ‘friends’, but rather the critics that tore DVC a new one when it premiered in 06, and that so far aren’t being too kind to A&D, either.

“So you’re saying that after 3 years, people have rethought their feelings about it and won’t be tricked into seeing Angels & Demons, despite it being a number one best-seller and being marketed as thrill ride in addition?”

No, I’m saying people that walked out of the theatre disappointed might think twice before spending money on the same premise again (and face it, it IS the same premise, just set in Rome and with a popular Star Trek substance at the heart of the story). The DVC was hardly a ‘thrill ride’ either, despite being billed as one. Ya know, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…

At any rate, I wasn’t arguing that Trek would beat Da Vinci at all. I think that’s a daft idea. Trek will likely do Batman Begins business ($200 mil). Only that I’m not convinced A&D will do the same business DVC did. That’s all.

95. VOODOO - May 11, 2009

“Star Trek” is off to an AMAZING start lets hope it keeps up.

- That undajusted opening weekend chart is kind of misleading. Studios didn’t open films on thousands of screens in the 70′s, 80′s, and some of the 90′s.

- Also, “Star Trek” is going to have a tough time topping the adjusted for inflation box of of “TMP” and “TVH” which were both well over $200 million.

96. S. John Ross - May 11, 2009

#88: “Trek 1.0 opens during the worst global recession in decades, yet it succeeds beyond our wildest expectations? ”

Hollywood grew to prominence during the Great Depression, remember. Bad times often sell _more_ movie tickets, not less.

97. 750 Mang - May 11, 2009

Just picked up IMAX tickets for the weekend.

Should be fun.

Just about everyone I know Trek fan and not have gone to see the movie.

98. Driver - May 11, 2009

Time to get writing on that sequel, which will be better than Star Trek(09), but will not be as good as the one after that which has to out perform the next one coming out which hasn’t been made yet.

99. darrksan - May 11, 2009

78. Julio – May 11, 2009
I read Orci’s explanation of the Shatner scene he had in mind, and I agree with their decision to leave it out. It sounded too “forced” to me, personally.
——————————————————-
I think it is good to leave Shatner out of the new films but I only think Nimoy needs to leave too.

Dear Mr. Orci,
I think Prime Spock need to go back home to his The Prime universe in the sequel, maybe Prime Spock can say something like “I need to go back and try to save my old friend (hinting: Prime Kirk)”. I also think the sequel needs more Science in it.

100. Josh - May 11, 2009

Movies almost always lost something like 2/3 of it’s opening weekend make in the 2nd weekend. If Star Trek makes $30 million or so next weekend (I think that’d be a 32% drop or something), then it’s going to do reasonably well.

We’ll also see by Thursday how much legs it’s got. Wolverine has shown itself not to have much of a leg, dropping over 1/3 from Monday to Thursday (pretty much having a consistent daily dropoff of about 13%) and then dropping nearly 70% this weekend from last weekend.

If Star trek can make about $5 to $6 million Monday-Thursday and then hit about $30 million next weekend, I’d say that that would be an excellent sign (and would push it to about $130 after 10 full days)

101. Josh - May 11, 2009

Pardon, that’d be a 62-63% drop, not a 32% drop.

102. falcon - May 11, 2009

To those who would like to see the next movie with a bigger budget – it may not be necessary. Since the sets for this movie will no doubt be reused (with the exception of the Narada-specific sets), that cost has already been spent. So a movie with a larger scale (if possible) and a deeper story could be told for less money – and make a bigger profit for Paramount.

In fact, if they amortize the cost of the sets over three movies and make a big enough profit, they could fund a new TV series. Hmm, who do you think would pick it up. Oh, I don’t know…maybe…CBS? Ironic that CBS originally turned down Roddenberry’s pitch for Trek, opting instead for Lost In Space.

103. The Last Maquis - May 11, 2009

So I finally saw the Movie.

Prognosis: Negative!!

It was exactly what I thought it would be. EXPLOSIONS!! and NOISE !! a lot of it didn’t make sense, AND they (JJ and Co.) Seemed to like it that way. Nimoy was just like what Peter Cullen was in Transformers, a fan boy service to sell the movie. It’s like having something you love and respect and then letting someone take it and put whatever they want on it and throw it against a wall like a bucket of paint. You can recognize somethings and they even look good, but as a whole, it was one big mess!! Nero’s motivation (or Lack There of) for attacking the Federation was Dumb!!! This Is the Character inspired By Khan?, He Pales in comparison to Khan. He was More Comparable to Dr. Soran but with muscles as far as the Whole revenge thing goes. if Nero can travel through time then Why didn’t he go back sometime before Romulus was destroyed and prevent it? Why did we even need to see a Young Kirk, It didn’t matter. because they didn’t show him do anything else. Oh and by the way I hate The Beastie Boys.
They introduce us to everybody Quickly then move on to the next Person, Hi I’m Sulu. okay. Hi I’m Chekov. okay. The Uhura and Spock thing didn’t feel right and didn’t really add much.

Most of the Characters were either over the top or Not on par. Pine’s Kirk was Neither, but that’s not a good thing. Quinto does an alright job as young Spock but there isn’t enough time for him to Get into it because he has to deal with a new Problem every five seconds. Uhura was an Acceptable embellishment, but still not enough time to develop the Character. Chekov was Way over, Sulu Way under. Scotty would’ve Been alright had he not Been relegated to Comic relief.

Now for The Positives. Karl Urban as McCoy, I thought Knocked it out of the Park!! He accomplished what the Film makers were trying to do by infusing TOS with a Newer version of it.

I guess I don’t hate the New Enterprise look. Except for those Hideous interiors. The FX were a Step up for sure, but so what? Capt. Pike was Cool too, but again Not enough Character time for him. Leonard Nimoy, It was Awesome to See him as Spock again. Very cool. The Opening was Very Good. It would have been cool if There was more going on aboard the Kelvin, Before They went into battle. What the Hell was up with those Stupid “Lost in Space” End Credits?

I left the Theater Saying, ” I don’t Know, I don’t Know.” But now I do. I didn’t like this Movie. Not that much. I kept thinking that I should have Gone To see Wolverine.

104. Kymalairn - May 11, 2009

I’m really surprised at these numbers. I caught the movie at a 10 pm Thursday night and a 9 pm Friday night. At both shows the audience was light. I even went to see if Friday at a fan-friendly theater. It’s a Cinemark that usually gets huge crowds for genre pictures. The place was packed for a midnight show of Friday the 13th, for God’s sake.

When my buddy and I predicted the gross after seeing the film I said between 40 and 50 million, going by the reception I saw inside. It’s not like we’re out in the middle of nowhere. We’re 15 minutes from Philadelphia. Anyway, it’s good that it’s doing well.

105. Josh - May 11, 2009

103 -

“Nero’s motivation (or Lack There of) for attacking the Federation was Dumb!!!”

“if Nero can travel through time then Why didn’t he go back sometime before Romulus was destroyed and prevent it?”

You obviously didn’t watch the movie.

106. Alec - May 11, 2009

103 = proof that most of the people that don’t enjoy this movie are just plain stupid

107. BK613 - May 11, 2009

I will always wonder what TWOK’s numbers might have been if it hadn’t opened during the same summer as Blade Runner, Tron and ET.

108. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

what i didn’t like about star trek xi:
5. It’s no secret that the beastie boys are trekkies, but was it totally necessary to include one of their old 90′s songs in the soundtrack?
4. Boy Spock: a UFC Vulcan fighter?
3. Future Spock being marooned on the same planet that young Scotty just so happened to be on as well (with a lovely view of imploding Vulcan)?
2. Imploding Vulcan
1. The fact that Future Spock survived after helping save Earth. It’s a problem because: Future Janeway died saving Voyager and so did Future Chakotay and Harry. Kirk went to the future and died saving a solar system and the Enterprise D. Future Spock’s survival ruins continuity.

109. The Last Maquis - May 11, 2009

#106

because I don’t enjoy something, That makes me Stupid?

Are you sure it’s me?

110. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

I agree with you all the way 103 <3 <3 <3

111. Josh - May 11, 2009

108 – *sigh* just… *sigh*

#2 is about the only legitimate complaint there maybe.

#5 seems so trivial a complaint that it’s almost silly someone lists it as one of their “top” complaints

#4 – I’m trying to figure out the problem with this. A combination of insulting his mother, being half human, and being a member of a relatively strong species….is it necessarily that surprising?

#3 – Well, being on the same planet that Scotty was on was a coincidence, but he was put there for the very purpose of being able to see imploding Vulcan (like 103, you apparently didn’t watch the movie)

#1 – again, this is a separate timeline ala the Mirror Universe. Spock is there there because he is from a different timeline, universe, dimension, whatever. Again, you apparently didn’t watch the movie. (though, I’m not sure what the other examples are exactly supposed to show?)

112. Mr. Zoom - May 11, 2009

#37 – I recommended the new movie this afternoon to an employee at a cafe where I had lunch today. Might stop in next week to see how he liked it. ;-)

113. Josh - May 11, 2009

109 – No, it’s because your characterization of the things that you dislike are just plain wrong.

Nero wants revenge because Spock and the Federation was friggen too late in saving Romulus. I’d say that gives him plenty of motivation to take revenge on the Federation.

Nero went back in time to where he did because he had no choice…that’s where the black hole dumped him. That’s also why Kirk is there. Because, well, he’s there. Did we “need’ to see a young Kirk? If you mean, would this have happened in a time frame where Kirk either wasn’t born yet or already died, then yeah. Of course, Star Trek (and movies in general) are replete with such coincidences, so I’m not sure what your problem is.

Much of the rest of it is your own opinion, but we had a job of introducing no fewer than 7 major characters by my count in this movie. There just isn’t enough time to give them each their own story arc in a 2 hour movie. You just can’t. However, each of them were able to show off their stuff at one time or another, which is more than what they could have done.

114. The Last Maquis - May 11, 2009

105. Josh

I obviously didn’t watch it several times, just once.
and if the Time travel aspect was explained, it was done so in the span of two seconds followed by Explosions and Noise.

I can tell you that I will not watch it at the Theater again.

115. Sci-Fi Bri - May 11, 2009

what i liked about star trek xi:
5. It’s no secret that the beastie boys are trekkies, it was totally necessary to include one of their old 90’s songs in the soundtrack!
4. Boy Spock: a UFC Vulcan fighter!
3. Future Spock being marooned on the same planet that young Scotty just so happened to be on as well (with a lovely view of imploding Vulcan)?
2. Imploding Vulcan
1. The fact that Future Spock survived after helping save Earth. It’s not a problem because: Future Spock is a continuation of the TNG universe and will do what he can to help the Vulcans after the tragic loss of their planet.

116. Josh - May 11, 2009

114 – I believe it was explained not only once…but twice: when Kirk and Spock first conclude that they’re dealing with someone from the future and, more thoroughly, during Spock’s mindmeld with Kirk. Both, coincidentally, during rather calm times during the movie.

117. rm10019 - May 11, 2009

Everyone should remember that Star Trek IV did VERY well commercially, and drew an audience outside of its fanbase as well. 1986/1987 was a very good time for Trek, and we should thank those who came before for keeping it alive then. Mr. Nimoy was a major player in that, as well as Gene Roddenberry and Bob Justman for bringing TNG to the small screen, with an unknown bald british actor named Patrick Stewart.

118. BP - May 11, 2009

103 – Nero can travel through time? Uh no, you didn’t see the movie did you?

119. The Last Maquis - May 11, 2009

113. Josh

So I’m now wrong to Dislike things? (Sigh)

Please Someone else tell me that it’s okay to not like this film? and be able to express that here.

120. Jim - May 11, 2009

#95, the inflation adjusted TMP numbers ARE up there, Trek XI already beat them.

People tend to adjust numbers of movies more than a decade back WAY too high which is why you got insane numbers for some movies.

But the other factor is movies these days do NOT stay in theaters as long as they did in the past. TMP was in the theater for almost half a year.

121. ...I have touched the sky. - May 11, 2009

The movie was awesome. Not only because I really enjoyed it because I looked around each time I saw it and realized that a lot of people who are NON-Trekkies like myself were enjoying it.

There was this couple sitting next to me, annoying the living SHOOT out of me. They guy was making stupid “oh, snap” comments and the girl was snapping her gum every 5 minutes. I was about ready to say something – when i came to a HUGE realization. They were actually enjoying the movie!

I kept my mouth shut. And for everything that they did to annoy me, I realized that they were liking the movie more and more. I continued to keep my mouth shut.

At the end of the movie, it was obvious they had enjoyed themselves.

There isn’t ANYTHING that could have pleased me more than having kept my mouth shut. Because in the end, that movie experience was something that they enjoyed. And they tell their friends, and in so doing, the franchise continues.

The movie has it’s ups and downs. Overall, it was amazing.

Sit back and enjoy it for what it is. A story. People are liking it. The numbers prove it. Let’s celebrate! FUDGE YEA!

I know I sound like a dork, but seriously people, OUR Star Trek is alive!

IT’S ALIVE!!!!!!!!

122. Josh - May 11, 2009

119 – I didn’t say you can’t dislike the movie. What I’m saying is that you should at least KNOW what you are disliking

123. spiked canon - May 11, 2009

SANTA MONICA, California — This past weekend, $76.5 million worth of people saw Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Leonard Nimoy onscreen in J.J. Abrams’ blockbuster “Star Trek” reboot. The one person they didn’t see, however, is larger-than-life “Trek” icon William Shatner.

During the course of the film’s production, a bizarre battle of words erupted between Abrams and the 78-year-old original Captain Kirk over a never-filmed, top-secret scene. Recently, we got the spoiler-heavy details on the very different ending once intended to be Nimoy and Shatner’s final time together onscreen.

“We did write a Shatner scene,” Roberto Orci, one of the film’s writers and producers, explained. “And we were ultimately split internally. We didn’t want it to be a gimmick; we wanted to really bring him back in the right way.”

If you’ve seen the new “Trek,” you know that Nimoy portrays the original Spock in a series of scenes that has the character traveling to an alternate dimension and making contact with younger versions of the Enterprise crew. In one heart-tugging moment, “old” Spock addresses “young” Spock and explains their eventual friendship with Kirk; in the Shatner version, however, young Spock was to be more skeptical.

“Elder Spock tells young Spock, ‘I couldn’t tell you the truth about what’s happening, because if I had, I would have robbed you of the benefit of realizing the greatness that you and Kirk will achieve together — and the amazing friendship that you’ll have. You had to discover that for yourself, and I couldn’t get in the way of that,’ ” Orci’s writing partner, Alex Kurtzman, revealed. “And in our original version, younger Spock says, ‘I’m still not sold.’

“Elder Spock said, ‘Well, don’t take my word for it,’ and he handed him a little disc — a DVD, really — that projected a hologram, and then he walked away. And the hologram was of Kirk,” Kurtzman continued. “It would’ve been Shatner.”

The scene was an attempt by the writers to adhere to “Trek” canon — which depicted Shatner’s Kirk as being killed in 1994′s “Star Trek: Generations” — yet still give him a presence in the film via a final recording he had taped before his death.

“If you follow ‘The Next Generation’ [TV show], elder Spock went off to Romulus to be an ambassador in two episodes called ‘Unification 1′ and ’2′, and [our] idea was that it was a long, long mission, and Kirk would have died by the time he returned to Earth [because they] just wouldn’t have the same lifespan,” Kurtzman explained of the Vulcan. “And so [this DVD] was essentially Kirk sending Spock a goodbye.”

“His final message,” Orci interrupted.

“It was a ‘happy birthday’ message [with Kirk saying], ‘This is the last time I’m going to be able to wish you happy birthday, so I want to tell you how much you’ve meant to me and how amazing it was that we had all these adventures together,’ ” Kurtzman said of the alternate ending, which would have provided the last act with a powerful voice over the film’s final scenes.

“That narrative, that voice-over,” Kurtzman said, “became a link [to be heard] over [scenes of] this new crew coming in … a young Kirk accepting the medal and becoming captain of the Enterprise.”

“The entire ending of the movie, where you’re seeing young Kirk being promoted,” Orci added, “all that was going to be [played out with Shatner's] voice-over.”

Ultimately, the Shatner ending of “Star Trek” was abandoned for a whole variety of reasons. “Whereas our elder Spock had a very organic reason to be there, we didn’t have that same benefit with Kirk,” Kurtzman explained. “Because Kirk died in the movies — he died in canon — it was very hard to come up with a way to bring him back in the movie that didn’t feel contrived.”

“Ultimately, we decided internally that we were split,” Orci remembered of the decision to abandon the Shatner ending. “The decision was that it wasn’t quite enough to justify wasting his time.”

Still, it’s pretty obvious where Orci fell in the internal debate. “It was a nice voice-over. It was more than a scene,” he explained. “I think it could have worked, personally.”

Will the vampires grab more trophies than the slumdog? What was the year’s ultimate onscreen WTF moment? It’s up to you to decide the winners of the 2009 MTV Movie Awards. Vote now, and tune in on May 31 at 9 p.m. ET, when the big show airs live from the Gibson Amphitheatre in Universal City, California.

Check out everything we’ve got on “Star Trek.”

For breaking news, celebrity columns, humor and more – updated around the clock – visit MTVMoviesBlog.com.

124. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

No Josh you are wrong. Nero’s motive was too weak to be legitimate. Now what made Kahn’s motive work was that the audience already knew Kahn, and who his wife was, and the Eugenics war, etc. But Nero…..who???? Even Spocks mindmeld flashback was too weak an explanation.
Now it is my belief that the writers, who we all know by now, intended to incorporate the Guardian of Forever into this movie, which would have worked wonderfully. But of course the writer of The City on the Edge of Forever, Harlan Ellison, would have sued Abrams if he didn’t get his share of the profit.

125. braxus - May 11, 2009

I guess this easily gives the green light for the sequal now.

Speaking of IMAX, I think they should shoot the sequal entirely in IMAX and outdo what they did for Dark Knight. Think about it. Its the perfect type of movie for IMAX and now that Paramount is seeing the dollars come in- they should consider it.

Bob Orci- consider pitching to Paramount to use IMAX in the next film and if they go for it- you know that will be history in the making in cinema. Think- Big space adventure with ships flying around on an IMAX sized screen. It would be a first. If you want a taste of what that would look like- watch the IMAX movie “Special Effects” and watch the scene where the Rebel cruiser and Star Destroyer fly across the screen. Think about it.

126. Nostalgic G - May 11, 2009

I still can’t understand how Wolverine makes 87 million dollars on opening weekend when all the critics bashed it (33% on rotten tomatoes) and the film was even leaked weeks before its release, plus X3 sucked. Mind boggling what Kids today go to the movies for.

I hope word of mouth, and the stellar reviews helps get the younger crowd and the non fan crowd to show up for Trek in the coming week.

If Angels and Demons has an opening weekend bigger than Trek’s 79 million opening I will truly loose all faith in the American movie going public. The first one was terrible and Angels and Demons is at 76% on rotten tomatoes — much lower than Trek’s nearly perfect score of 96%.

127. Pete - May 11, 2009

Ok, I feel it is our civic duty to see this movie at least three times at the theater. Not only will it help the movie earn what it’s worth(which is a lot), but more so help push Paramount to make another. Big thanks to TrekMovie for posting this. Now, book your next ticket and see it again. Set Phasers to kill. :p

128. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

*Neck pinches Sci-Fi Bri* xD

129. pock speared - May 11, 2009

gee, imagine how many more billions they would’ve made if only they had not used lens flares, made the nacelles thicker, never hired pegg, not called a planet delta vega, etc, blah canon blah, my childhood is bleeding from the rectum, blah, etc, canon violation blah, and of course; made a “real” trek film.

i’m laughing at the superior arrogant intellect. THIS is how you save star trek.

there is a case of champagne for b’orcurtzman and “jar jar abrams” in my cellar whenever they need it. not that they will.

130. SPOCKBOY - May 11, 2009

I think the PERFECT (and still subtle) Shatner cameo could have been Shatner doing a new version of the Space the Final Frontier speech at the end of the movie- Just a thought! :)

131. spiked canon - May 11, 2009

amen pock

132. Pete - May 11, 2009

And screw Ebert for throwing off the rating at Rotten Tomatoes. He must have been off his meds. Had to say it!

133. spiked canon - May 11, 2009

i think it would’ve spockboy if they went with the alternate kirk ending—still worked though

134. the Quickening - May 11, 2009

In the light of spending almost 150 million in advertising–along with 140 million in production cost–and not really solving the problems of gaining younger demographics or an international audience, can this really be looked at as a success?

135. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

Spockboy, where have you been? The Gamma quadrant? Lord Shatner doesn’t do cameos!

136. duz all enterprice haz phaz0r? - May 11, 2009

Remember Quickening, this movie was basically the Motion Picture II. Star Trek XII will be TWOK II :))))))

137. ToddM - May 11, 2009

#53, yes you hear the fanfare within the movie itself.

138. Pete - May 11, 2009

What is it with people and the lens flares? I thought the lighting FX brought a heightened sense of reality to the scenes. Watch the old movies, the bridge scenes look hokey. The new movie took a nod from Boyle’s movie FX wise and made it edgier. Who is going to gripe that the nacelles weren’t good enough? That’s just silly nitpicking. Geezzzz.

139. Daoud - May 11, 2009

#134 Man, what’s in your water?

I have five teenagers, who’ve never cared about Star Trek. It was mom and dad’s geeky thing.

Now, all five, ages 20, 18, 18, 16 and 15 are transfixed by it. My oldest’s seen it twice, the 18s once, and the 16 and 15 twice and both going to see it in IMAX this weekend.

They like Star Trek. It’s bizarro… but like the poster above mentioned in #121… nothing wrong with this.

Star Trek was misreported in 1969, too. When they went back and looked at real demographics, it scored big on the younger audience.

Right now, Variety and all the pros are *embarrassed*. Their initial projects were at 50 million. They wrote it off. They still are underreporting it. Give it time.

Yeah, like any of these younger kids give a frackin’ A about seeing Angels and Demons. None of mine do. They also HATED Da Vinci Code.

I’m still amused wondering how #RD has already seen A&D like he claims above in #69.

And honestly, I do get him. What’s not to understand about someone who goes out of their way to a pro-Star Trek movie site to accuse Michael Giacchino of plagiarism and being unoriginal? Enjoy Angels and Demons! Tom Hanks looks so excited. I’m sure Buffy and Hildegarde can’t wait either!

140. cleverclogs - May 11, 2009

Here in australia I feel a sense of apathy with much of the population. It is unfortunate that it never found its place on prime-time TV here, and thus no one really gives a damn about it. ALSO, it wasn’t advertised in the real-world much, and certainly no big promo tie-ins with fast food chains.
I’ve seen it twice now, and probably will see it again before it leaves the big screen.

141. Eliza - May 11, 2009

Good movie, very entertaining! Some little things here and there but great overall! I’ve loved Star Trek since junior high and I’ll keep loving it! But, maybe it’s just me, I’m kinda getting annoyed at all these new “super fans” talking like they know and own Star Trek more than me, especially those that made fun of me for being a Trekkie for years! What’s with that?

142. BCF - May 11, 2009

It’s nice to see Star Trek doing pretty good box-office wise. I was very worried on opening night (went Thursday to a 7 pm showing) and was underwhelmed by the crowd size. It seemed thin…like the curse of Nemesis was still lingering.

Good news: I went to Star Trek tonight (Monday 7 pm showing) and there was a much larger audience. I was shocked. Usually when I go on a Monday, it is to avoid a crowd. Not this time.

And what was really great, was the crowd was more excited at the end of this movie. They clapped and cheered after Nimoy’s closing narration. Most of the crowd was young twenty-somethings too.
One non-fan who went with me asked me when the sequel was coming out. So hopefully this will grow into a Batman Begins type of phenomenon!

143. Spock, you rascal you - May 11, 2009

Saw it again today, monday, at the 3:00pm showing at IMAX, 3pm on monday and the theatre was packed! When I left the movie the line for the next showing at 5:45 was out the door. Pretty good I would say for a monday mid day show.

144. RD - May 11, 2009

#139, what’s in your water Daoud? I never claimed to have seen the movie, but read the book like you obviously did from your reference in #64, from which I never assumed you saw the unreleased movie. A&D will do extremely well and Trek will suffer because it will siphon off the main-stream fans that Paramount so masterfully pulled in over opening weekend. That is my prediction. Just because you don’t personally like DVC or A&D, don’t foolishly discount the mass appeal which Dan Brown or Tom Hanks holds on the majority of main-stream audiences – the A&D paperback is currently #5 on the NYT Bestseller list, 6 years after it was originally published. A MASS AUDIENCE is getting ready for the movie. I keep throwing figures out like 3/4 of a Billion earned on DVC, despite the horrible critics reviews and yet the only response I get are personal evaluations that seemingly trump that of the worldwide movie audiences.

Also, watch accusing folks of liable. I never said Giacchino plagiarized anything. If I was not clear enough for you, he modeled his score for the Incredibles (which I quite like) off of John Barry scores. In fact the movie was temped with Barry scores. In case you didn’t know, most films today are temporarily scored with other peoples music and usually that ends up being emulated on some level. It was intentional, completely original, but entirely inspired by and easily mapped to the scores of Barry.

ALSO, WHEN DID THIS BECOME A PRO-TREK MOVIE SITE? I thought it was just a Trek Movie site. If you go back over the history of this site, there is a fare amount of criticism and trepidation that the TOS Remasters were good enough, that Abrams was good enough or that they would stay true to TOS. Boy do I miss those days when people actually debated the merits of various decisions, instead of trying to brow-beat those of us who see the flaws in the Abrams’ machine.

PLEASE LEAVE YOUR PERSONAL ATTACKS AT HOME. If you want a pro-Trek site that agrees with everything you think or say, then you need to lobby Anthony to banish those of us who “speaketh heresy” or you need to find another site, or perhaps start one yourself.

145. pock speared - May 11, 2009

#130 SPOCKBOY

ya know, if anyone else had said that, i might have winced at their inability to cope with the finale.

but you, the guy, let’s face it, who has created the finest work of its kind out there, those little gems that seem to understand, love and satire the series,
those sincere and brilliant, smart and consise investments into the CULTURE of trek, and it’s place in popular culture;

make an excellent point.

a shatner outro would have truly been the best possible (and likely caused the loudest applause) ending to a truly, nearly perfect star trek
rebirth.

i’m not just gushing, man. you’re work is solid.

best and only helpful critique of the film i’ve heard yet. cheers.

146. ken1w - May 11, 2009

I saw it twice. I’ve seen very few movies at the cinema in the last few years, let alone two times in one weekend. The second time was better than the first time. JJ Abrams is an exceptionally talented director and producer. True, the film is the work of many talented artists, but he pulled it all together and provided the vision and focus. Compare Star Trek (2009) to the previous Star Trek film (Nemesis) – there is no comparison.

The attention-to-detail was everywhere, while not simply copying. They must have made a list of every well-known Trek catch-phase and cliché and found an appropriate (non-cliché) way to use as many as possible in the story. McCoy’s “I’m a doctor, not a physicist” line was great. Chekov cracked me up with every line. Sulu’s “fencing” as his combat training. Spock’s “fascinating.” Scotty’s “I’m giving you all she’s got.” Pike in a wheelchair, wearing the dress uniform from Star Trek The Motion Picture.

Even the music is less less symphonic, less complex, less dense, more percussive, and more horn-centric. In other words, it is more like the incidental music from the original series that they re-used over and over again in all the episodes. It is not John Williams and the London Symphony, a la Star Wars. I think Michael Giacchino’s work here is extremely thoughtful, contemporary, and inspiring. I bought the album on iTunes, and I can’t stop listening to it.

When you put it all together, you have a Star Trek movie that “feels” closer to the original series that any of the previous Trek films, yet somehow completely different. How is that possible?

147. Jim Nightshade - May 11, 2009

Didnt we read here that there are 255 million trek fans around the world? So if every one of them would just see it once…I am happy that myself and my two bros were part of the record breaking Imax audiences in Seattle on Friday! I will still be taking family and friends at least once perhaps twice more! We all have to see it as much as we can if we want future adventures!

148. Starbuck - May 11, 2009

Just saw the movie. I quit watching Star Trek a long time ago because of the plot recycling & Aliens that all look humans with head bumps, ect…..it got real old. This movie by Abrams changed that. I was never a fan of the spin offs, and I thought I would give the franchise another chance. I was pleasantly surprised and liked the movie very much. I hope that they continue down this road. I will see it again, buy the DVD, ect. great casting, good plot, and hopefully they lock abrams up for another Trek.

149. Gary Seven of Nine - May 11, 2009

How did you come-up with $150 million in advertising?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

134. the Quickening – May 11, 2009

In the light of spending almost 150 million in advertising–along with 140 million in production cost–and not really solving the problems of gaining younger demographics or an international audience, can this really be looked at as a success?

150. Sebi - May 11, 2009

The movie would have performed better international if Paramount did more marketing, ads and so on..

I said it before and I say it again: If not for trekmovie.com, I’d never know that they were making a new movie. For example: TV spots started only a week before the films release here in Germany.

Bottom line:
The movie could have made more money international, but its totally Paramounds fault cause they didn’t spend the extra buck on the marketing in Europe…

151. Hawaiowa - May 11, 2009

Anthony, thanks for making up the bar graphs. I had a mischievous thought: what would a chart look like using ST2009′s numbers reverse-adjusted to the current currency values of earlier movies? How would this year’s Trek be calculated in 1979 dollars, for example. Just for fun, rounding the box office number to 80 million and using 2008 (since 2009 isn’t over yet):

TMP/1979: $27,316,463.16
WoK/1982: $36,317,869.06
SFS/1984: $39,091,682.63
THV/1986: $41,268,463.88
TFF/1989: $46,643,386.15
TUC/1991: $51,226,938.42
Gen/1994: $55,759,672.11
FCt/1996: $58,868,273.83
Ins/1998: $60,826,939.03
Nem/2002: $67,201,754.10

and just for kicks n giggles…

TOS/1966: $12,184,999.42

I can’t remember what Desilu was spending per episode in 1966, but if memory serves, it was approx. $600K for the pilot and $185-200K budgeted per episode. Translating the 2009 box into 1966 money, this means that the 2009 movie draw would have roughly been double the expenses for TOS’s first season, which are $5.8 million.

Using this baseline, the next Trek movie in 2011 will need to bring in:

TNM/2011: $96,810,046.64

to break even with this one’s box office, if adjusted for a 6.56% annual inflation rate.

Inflation numbers courtesy of on-line calculator at http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ and my trusty MS Calculator Plus proggie.

Just my way of saying thanks for all your hard work on this site, Anthony.

152. Phasers On Stun - May 11, 2009

#142 & 143
Great to here that Monday had a good crowd!

I had planned to see it on Sunday but couldn’t wait and went Saturday morning IMAX. It was packed. I never see films more than once but couldn’t help myself and went on sunday (35mm). Packed again.

The crowds have been mixed in age, young and old, which has been surprising. In fact Sunday’s showing seemed much much younger. And I know people who are not ST fans that are going this weekend. You can’t beat good word of mouth.

I feel like I’m reliving that 1977 Star Wars excitement all over again except its Star Trek. I’ll probably see it one more time and have to live off Giacchino’s great work on the soundtrack until the DVD is available.

153. Hawaiowa - May 11, 2009

Another thought…I would love it if they used Orci’s suggested Shat scene in the eventual DVD package, either as alternate ending or a ‘Director’s cut’ including the 20mins of Nero, and a few of the other scenes they dropped. When I read the alternate scene with Shat that they scripted, I was almost in tears. The only thing I would have changed was to have Spock and Kirk both get medals, and then Kirk gets awarded the captaincy…as the voice over runs on.

Of course, almost every fan would have died to hear Shat’s “Space…the final frontier” to close out the movie. Too bad they dropped the ball on that one. Maybe someone could intrigue him to do it for the DVD by donating $100K to one of his charities…and then make it a total surprise and not even hint that it’s on the DVD.

I’m dreaming…

…but they did do the Austin event, so any thing’s possible

154. RD - May 11, 2009

#147 – there are about 2 billion Christians in the world. However, just try to get them all to agree on how the religion should be practiced. From what I’ve seen just on this PRO-ABRAMS site, there a number of Trek fans who don’t care for the new movie and won’t give it a watch. There are a those who saw it, but were disappointed and unlikely to go again or recommend it. There are those who loved it and will see it again and again. Based on a rough calculation of box-office numbers, only about 8 million people saw Trek this weekend and we know that figure also represents a number of repeat screenings. If there were 255 million Trek fans in the world, wouldn’t you think that more would have seen it? Not to mention, this thread alone indicates a large number of non-fans make up that 8 million person figure. Further, if that’s all it took to make a Trek movie succeed, why didn’t the earlier Trek movies blow everything else out of the water too? Heck even Nemesis should have blown the competition out of the water, simply form the Trek fans who want to support the franchise.

The evidence suggests that not every Trek fan is as devoted as the next. And within the Trek “religion” there are TNG & TOS sects and even those who worship at the false alter of Enterprise, many of which will not cross the threshold of a “place of worship” that preaches otherwise. That means, there are plenty of Trek fans who want nothing to do with TOS, or TNG, or DS9, or VOY, or Ent.

And like religion, nor should they be obligated to. Heck some of those Trek fans may even feel like a Trek movie should actually entertain them, regardless of which character sits in the Captain’s chair. In a perfect world we should all embrace the entire franchise, but really why should someone support the franchise for others when it’s doing nothing for them?

Trek has already surpassed its predecessors and will do just fine without the alleged 255 million fans. Clearly Abram’s formula hit the right tone for enough of the Trek fanbase, but more importantly new-recruits, to keep the franchise alive. Let’s not get greedy. I mean honestly, why are people so obsessed about this film being the highest grossing film of all time? Does it some how validate a lifetime of Trek obsession if it does? Cause I got news for ya, just because some Muslims visit a Catholic worship service and enjoy it, does not make them Christians. They’re still gonna look at you like you got it wrong in the end.

155. Daoud - May 11, 2009

#154 Now I’m starting to wonder how the partial pressure of oxygen is on your starship, too.

BTW, in 2006, PotC: Dead Man’s Chest did $1.1 billion including overseas. Clearly it’s 25% a better movie than the DaVinci Code. Notably, Ice Age: The Meltdown came in at 2/3 of a billion. (Boy, Ray Milano better get ripping on the next one, Ice Age: Still Ain’t Enough Global Warming!!) I’d agree that the DVC movie is something less than Dead Man’s Chest, and marginally more impressive than Ice Age: Another Sequel.

Who is “Abram”? What’s a false “alter”? Where in the world is anyone suggesting this would be the highest grossing film of all time? It’s certainly going to be the highest grossing Star Trek film of all time, because it’s already at #4 out of 11 after only one weekend.

Muslims at a Catholic worship service? Huh? Wow, dude. Shatner SNL + Nimoy SNL.

156. The Governator - May 11, 2009

154. RD

For the most part, that was actually well stated. Perhaps I can put it more simply?

Yeah, the film is obviously doing quite well. Better than any Trek film has by far and better than Batman Begins, the predecessor to one of the highest grossing films of all time. I think the future is looking brigh for Trek. No question about it. Nuff said.

157. Spock's Uncle - May 11, 2009

103-et al: It seems that most of the arguments against the film really come from people who are angry it was the film THEY wanted… that somehow Trek must confirm to THEIR personal view of the things mentioned (Spock/Uhura, Pine’s performance, etc.). It was a very good movie, not without flaws, but very good, as the box office #s indicate. It may not be the Trek movie you wanted, or would make, but you weren’t given that chance, JJ was, and he did a great job. So good, that it gives the franchise legs again. That makes me VERY happy. It also isn’t the Trek movie I would have made, but I have no huge argument with the Vision expressed in the film. It retains the characters, the integrity, the “feel” of the Trek Universe we love. It opens up great new story ideas (and why are so many people itching to rehash old stories?) Let’s explore some new things… Maybe an “Easter Egg” reference to Carol Marcus, or Gary Mitchell, but no need to retread this thing. Let’s do what Star Trek was always about (according to Roddenberry) explore great themes of human drama using science fiction as the setting. For the naysayers, too bad, you’re missing out on the fun. For the fence sitters, go and see it, open your mind, you’ll discover a Trek that is true to the “essence” of Trek, without being beholden to every word of every script from every episode and movie that has preceeded this. It is a new Trek that celebrates, honors and continues the traditions of the Old Trek. I grew up with Star Trek, it’s in many ways sacred to me. Despite that prejudice, I LOVE this movie. And I can’t wait for the next one.

158. Spock's Uncle - May 11, 2009

sorry, correct first line of previous post:

103-et al: It seems that most of the arguments against the film really come from people who are angry it WAS NOT the film THEY wanted… that somehow Trek must confirm to THEIR personal view of the things mentioned (Spock/Uhura, Pine’s performance, etc.).

159. Allister gourlay - May 12, 2009

They still didn’t promote it enough here in the UK. (What was the promotion like in the rest of Europe?)
It seems that they hit the TV with the ads the day the film came out then afterwards, rather than promoting it before the film came out on the 8th.
So many of my friends and colleagues didn’t even know there was a new film released, so the pre-release buzz wasn’t as high as it was in the USA.

160. sans_shatner_1701 - May 12, 2009

Saw it for the second time after work today. Only 4 people in the theater at a 7:30 digital show. I actually dozed off a bit. Not as exciting as it was in a packed theater.

161. Covus - May 12, 2009

Saw it for the THIRD time yesterday. So I did my part :) I love this movie

162. lou - May 12, 2009

The cinema I saw it in wasn’t packed but to be fair the only time I’ve been to a completely jammed showing of a movie was when the LoTRs movies came out. Even seeing Harry Potter or Dark Knight it was to half full theatres. I think that considering it was being shown every hour in the cinemas near me means that not all showings would be packed

163. Sebi - May 12, 2009

@159 Allister gourlay

See my post #150

164. Todd - May 12, 2009

Saw it on Sunday night for the 2nd time – was a sell-out (and we’re talking a 500-seat cinema) here in Brisbane, Australia. Even though the opening weekend in this country wasn’t amazing, it’ll probably hold out longer than the US – we don’t get Terminator 4 until early June here. Good word of mouth should keep it going.

165. screaming satellite - May 12, 2009

52 – ok my bad – Trek may not have beaten DVC opening wkend of 77m but it came damn close!

166. Long Live and Prosper - May 12, 2009

I love this movie so much. I hope mr. Abram will make another suprises for the next Trek movie.

167. adam - May 12, 2009

random question

I’m not griping too much with some of the shaky logic in the film, but why does red matter black hole create a time portal to the past and then later simply just destroy vulcan and destroy the Narada? Shouldnt the Narada have been sucked into another time period?

168. Mel - May 12, 2009

In Germany around 400.000 people watched the new Star Trek film at the weekend.

The record is still hold by Star Trek: Insurrection with 825.000 people. Even Nemesis has around 480.000 viewers at the opening weekend in Germany.

http://www.cinema.de/kino/news-und-specials/news/erfolgreicher-neustart-fuer-spock-und-co-star-trek-beamt-sich-an-chart-spitze,3680697,ApplicationArticle.html

The article see the reason for that in the good May weather at the weekend. I think that is only part of the reason for the not spectacular reception. The advertising for the film was just pathetic. They were starting to show commercials perhaps a week before the movie started in the cinemas. And it wasn’t even many commercials. They could have really done more. Wolverine was better advertised.

169. Santos (Portugal) - May 12, 2009

Poor marketing in Portugal.

But I’ve seen it 2 times already. Very cool.
My non-trekkie friends loved it too.

170. 'Jean-Luc' - May 12, 2009

#168 – come on, at least you had the tour in Germany. We had no TV commercials in Poland. No outdoor campaigns (maybe except several places in Warsaw). Only 39 cinemas are playing Star Trek, and less than 30000 people saw the movie during the opening weekend.

171. Monda - May 12, 2009

Overseas market dissapoint? You know why? There is absolutely no advertising, marketing campaign at all! That’s why. I’m a fan, so I know when the movie comes out, but others who aren’t don’t have a clue that it’s even going to screen soon. Paramount did nothing more than hand the movies over and wait for the movie to sell itself. Sigh, I had great hopes that they will work their asses off to promote this movie. I live in Indonesia, btw, and since the movie only comes out in June, I flew over to Singapore to catch the premiere. The marketing work they do there was just as bad.

The movie was fantastic and I had hoped to share the excitement with non fans, but many of them thinks it’s a hard core scifi movie that they wouldn’t be interested in. So they don’t even give it a chance. It’s frustrating to wait for Paramount to do something, aarrgghhh! Although the numbers seem great, it could’ve been better, don’t you think?

I think they should’ve utilized the legions of fans spread across the world to help with the marketing more. I thought they have a large budget for marketing, I wonder what they do with it.

172. Paulaner - May 12, 2009

#146 “When you put it all together, you have a Star Trek movie that “feels” closer to the original series that any of the previous Trek films, yet somehow completely different. How is that possible?”

Talented writers / director :)

173. Todd - May 12, 2009

Promotion hasn’t been overwhelming here in Australia either – seen a couple of TV spots, that’s it. Wolverine also much more advertised here.

Having said that, I haven’t seen much TV in the last week or so..

174. Pete359 - May 12, 2009

Um, who keeps deleting my comments?

175. Sebi - May 12, 2009

@170 “#168 – come on, at least you had the tour in Germany”

That’s true, but the majority didn’t even know that we had it. So what did the tour for selling movie tickets in Germany? Nothing…

In my opinion, trekmovie.com did more for selling movie tickets in Germany then Paramount did. Anthony should get a commission fee or something…

176. Sebi - May 12, 2009

BTW, I am willing to do my share: I just bought tickets for watching it the 3rd time!

177. lukas - May 12, 2009

@168

Trek sold exactly the same amount of tickets than Wolverine did although the total number of moviegoers was down 20% due to the great weather. There is one important thing to see. In Germany folks prefer to go to the movies during winter times. There is no summer movie season here! I for myself usually don’t go during the summer. Made a few exceptions for Trek, though! ;)

178. sylar76 - May 12, 2009

Does this mean more money for the sequel? hmm… let’s hope Paramount build on this…

179. Trek Fan Forever - May 12, 2009

I’ve seen the movie twice, with the intent to see it AT LEAST one more time on IMAX. The movie was a thrill from beginning to end with humor, drama and emotion. With so many of my family and friends who are not Trek fans wanting to see this movie, I know that we have a hit on our hands.

While there were somethings that I had a difficult time accepting (Vulcan’s destruction and Amanda’s death), I did think that this was a phenomenally well developed film. I felt a lump in my throat when Spock Prime saw Kirk in the ice cave.

As for #60 and #65′s dislike for Michael Giacchino’s score, to each their own I guess. I have been playing it like a mad man on my iPod since May 5th and I love it each time I play it. I find it to be one of the most exhilarating Trek scores since TWOK. When I’m not playing it, I can still here it.

Can’t wait for viewing #3

180. afterace - May 12, 2009

In Poland there was a controversy because one of the two biggest cinema networks around here, Cinema City (also the IMAX owner here), refused to play the movie at all (or didn’t get a proper agreement with UIP – the reason is so far unknown), so ppl in many smaller cities (and even in som bigger ones) were UNABLE to see the movie at all. It was a big big shame, and thanksgiving to this the movie made preety poor here in Poland during the weekend. Add a basically invisible marketing (very few radio and tv spots), and you are able to make a poor movie out of a great movie ! But all in all, I live in a very WIERD country…

181. Zip - May 12, 2009

Seen it twice now, I enjoyed it as much during the second time around. I did see more cool stuff this time. First time was IMAX, Second time was regular theater. I still need to see it again :)
About the age thing, I’m almost 50 and I noticed much younger people than me at the IMAX, but the ages were varied at the regular theater, much older than me and also there were lots of teenagers. The younger people seemed move vocal I only heard great stuff about the movie. This is the First Trek movie for me, where the Enterprise didn’t seem to have the same feeling that the Captain and crew would have or show with regard to Pride. The Enterprise didn’t feel like one of the main characters this time around. Perhaps her second time out she’ll have a bigger voice.

182. Bob, The Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - May 12, 2009

My only complaint is that the bar, located about 30 minutes from THE University of Iowa, did not have any Hawkeye stuff anywhere. C’mon, that just totally ruined the realism of the movie for me. And I went three times to verify that I wasn’t missing anything.

183. spiked canon - May 12, 2009

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/05/george-lucas-not-happy-about-the-star-trek-box-office-success.html

funny

184. Gary the Gorn. - May 12, 2009

For the Star Trek hard core fans that aren’t happy with this or that or love to nit pick. Go back and watch “The Phantom Menace”. My son watched it the night before he went to the new “Star Trek” and he said it’s so slow it’s painful. He watched it with some friends at college and he said it was so bad they they were laughing during much of the film.

Be glad we have some talented writers and directors breathing fresh air into our beloved Star Trek franchise. The last few Star Trek films just felt like a long TV episodes. The last good Star Trek film was “First Contact”.

This new movie is doing much better than most people thought because…

1. No big name star
2. Last few Star Trek films were bad
3. Star Trek as a frachise was on life support
4. Star Trek was uncool
5. Movie is competing with the big summer releases (remember it was supposed to come out in December originally)

If you read this, and you haven’t been to the movie yet. Go see it. It’s a really fun movie. Hopefully this movie will lead to more Star Trek movies and maybe a Star Trek TV show or animated series. Plus a whole string of new fun books to read.

185. Gary the Gorn. - May 12, 2009

I forgot to add. I loved the fact they put Captain Pike in the film. He was always one of my favorite characters. And I loved the music, especially during the shuttle drop drill rig scence. It was AWESOME!!!

186. sean - May 12, 2009

#167

In both instances the black hole opened WITHIN the planet/ship. Maybe the parts/debris did travel to the past, but it’s difficult to remain alive during the trip when you’ve been turned inside out.

187. Commander K - May 12, 2009

Nero kept reminding me of Shinzon..except Nero didn’t get as much screentime as Shinzon.

188. Barney - May 12, 2009

I agree with people who have said that there was nowhere near enough UK marketing. Compared with what I’ve seen coming out of the USA, the UK stuff was very poor. Here in Edinburgh I saw one large billboard, and in the cinema I saw the movie in there were onyl small teaser posters up, in a small corner, until the week before the release date. Once the film opened they had two huge posters for the film, but again only in one small corner of the cinema.

I didn’t see any of the trailers in the cinema at all, from the teaser onwards, only online. And as for tv spots, I saw a couple of them, but really chopped down and only infrequently. Maybe Paramount thought that the media buzz (lots of positive reviews in the press etc) would do the work for them, but I spoke to many colleagues and friends who only knew about the film because of me and other trekkies though word of mouth – they had seen no advertising.

I wasn’t wowed by the film first time out, hopefully a second viewing tomorrow will make me appreciate it more.

189. Capt Krunch - May 12, 2009

Surely A/D will take a hunk out of profits, but I believe Trek will prevail..
now Terminator could really hurt us in 2 weeks, but my only hope is to beat the 200 mil bar!… After that…I’m only concern is the DVD this winter!!!

190. sean - May 12, 2009

#187

At least Nero wasn’t forced to use the tacky ’7 minute warmup’ weapon :)

191. AdamTrek - May 12, 2009

180. afterace – May 12, 2009
In Poland there was a controversy because one of the two biggest cinema networks around here, Cinema City (also the IMAX owner here), refused to play the movie at all (or didn’t get a proper agreement with UIP – the reason is so far unknown), so ppl in many smaller cities (and even in som bigger ones) were UNABLE to see the movie at all. It was a big big shame, and thanksgiving to this the movie made preety poor here in Poland during the weekend. Add a basically invisible marketing (very few radio and tv spots), and you are able to make a poor movie out of a great movie ! But all in all, I live in a very WIERD country…

Maybe they’re upset that this version of the Enterprise does not have a screen door installed on the airlock

=A=

192. rickey wilson - May 12, 2009

loved the movie it was awesome the actors portrayed the originals with gusto and true professionalisim! I hope they do more trek movies or a series!

193. AJ - May 12, 2009

Rosario;

The one factor not counted in your analysis is number of theaters.

Comparing TMP alone to Trek ’09, TMP opened in 857 theaters in 1979, while this ‘Trek’ opened on “7400 screens at 3849 locations.” (Box Office Mojo). so $75.2m over 3,849 theaters is $19,537 per theater. TMP, at $22.8m in 857 theaters, kicked JJ’s butt at $26,698 per theater, adjusted.

BOM shows TMP’s Opening weekend gross as 14.5% of the film’s total domestic gross. Iron Man’s OW last year was 31% of its total domestc take.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, films would remain in theaters for many months (Star Wars, and Crocodile Dundee, for example, were out over a year) and home video didn’t exist.

Now in 2009 we seem to ‘frontload’ most of a film’s viewing into a two-week time frame. Trek’s international success will very much determine its future.

The US numbers are average, running 24m under iron Man, in almost the same amount of theaters for a well-received blockbuster.

194. RD - May 12, 2009

TOP 10 TOP WORST WAYS TO BRING SHATNER BACK USING CANON:

1) Deadly Years Kirk: Pine is infected with the same disease and ages into Shatner, complete with shrinkage.
2) Mirror, Mirror Kirk: Kirk never sacrifices himself to help Picard defeat Soran, much less save the Enterprise B. Therefore he is available to travel back and cross over from the future Mirror Universe at any time.
3) Nemesis Kirk: In their first experiment, the Romulans create a Cloned Kirk who ages prematurely into Shatner and seeks revenge on Pine.
4) Nemisis Prime Kirk: Prime Romulans clone Kirk from Kirk’s remains on Veridian III, but banish him to Nero’s mining ship. After going back in time, Kirk leaves Nero’s ship and ages into Shatner who finally shows up.
5) The Enemy Within Kirk: A variation on the classic transporter accident due to changes alternate Scotty made, results in Kirk being split into old Shatner and baby Pine.
6) Generations Prime Kirk: Not only can Shatner exit the Nexus at any time, but in any alternate universe. The Enterprise passes through the Nexus and extracts Prime Kirk.
7) The Tholian Web Kirk: Those wacky Mirror Tholians break through into the normal universe at a later date and this time snag the Enterprise instead of the Constellation. Shatner is finally rescued by Pine.
8) City On The Edge of Forever Kirk: Pine goes back to rescue McCoy, but instead only 50 years. Unable to set the future right, an aged Shatner makes his way to warn the Kelvin to prevent the events as they unfold, then Vulcan and finally Pine about the Guardian.
9) All Our Yesterdays Kirk: Pine goes back 50 years to rescue Spock, but is instead stranded in the planet’s past. In a reboot of the film, Pine shows up only to be confronted with Shatner to stop him from going through the portal.
10) Complete 2nd Reboot a la The Incredible Hulk Prime Kirk: The entire franchise is rebooted again, but this time, in the comic book backstory Prime Kirk is captured by rogue Klingons to finally pay for his injustices against the Klingons over the years, but Kirk manages to escape and causes Klingon to explode and collapse into a black hole which pulls Kirk and the Klingons into an alternate universe where the Klingons are bent on revenge.

195. Bodey - May 12, 2009

How does the IMAX film play do the effects shots fill the screen like it did with the Sonar Dark knight sequence at the end?

196. oh_hear_ya - May 12, 2009

193. AJ

wow – great analysis. I really hope Trek continues to do well in the theaters. I just feel like there is more hype here than reality. I have seen this movie twice now – both time the theater has been virtually empty – less than 25 people or so. That’s pretty weak on the opening weekend in a busy metro area (SF BAY)

I think it would a cool experiment to advertise the film as only available in theaters for the rest of 09. Something like: “See Star Trek on the big Screen – not available on DVD until December 2009″ Create this embargo to encourage movie going.

197. David - May 12, 2009

Fx gave paramount up to and over 24 million for the rights to air the movie in 30 months. A sequal will defiantly happen, unless no one turns out next week i think this movie will gross 250 to 300 domestically.

In an unrelated question, in generations when kirk and picard go back, y aren’t there 2 picards. Besides the dreaded killing of kirk falling off a bridge, that has always bothered me and I don’t understand if picard was there and then came back, where did the other one go lol

198. Randy Hall - May 12, 2009

We’ve waited a long time for this, and I couldn’t be happier about both the movie and the theater take.

Life am good.

199. I, Mugsy - May 12, 2009

So glad this is doing exceptionally well – frankly it deserves to.

Just saw it this afternoon with a female mate who’s not into Star Trek and she LOVED it. I have been a Trek fan since around 1980 – mostly just the original series and films I-IV. Everything after that consign to an alternative universe… ;) (Preferred seeing the classic crew at the end of Star Trek IV all ready to go off and have new adventures and leave it there, rather than bizarrely SUDDENLY having he ship mothballed and the crew retired barely a film later!).

Anyways, I was VERY surprised by how much I enjoyed this new film. I didn’t have any complaints about ANY of the casting at all. Scotty was the one I was most worried about as he seemed THE comic relief from the trailer, but I thought he came off far better in the actual film. Pine IS Kirk – something I never thought would be possible. Ditto Quinto and Urban – fantastic work by all three, and indeed everyone else in the movie, particularly Mr Greenwood. Hope we see more of Pike, or even a Pike spin-off series?

The effects were stunning – easily the best of all the Star Treks in that respect. It’s like the difference between the original series and the films all over again in terms of effects. If ILM win no awards for this it’ll be criminal.

The story – lets face it the had an almost impossible task. To please 40 years of Trek fandom, IN ADDITION to today’s fickle 5-second attention span multi-plex addicts… and succeeded admirably. Sure parts of the story are more than a little conveniant, and Nero’s back story should have been SHOWN rather then detailed in a comic… but they got the balance correct and – most importantly – made it FUN! Never a dull moment on the screen, and some genuine surprises too. Had a lump in me throat when a certain characters Mother met her end… not to mention planet! This shows the writers have BALLS – nobody is safe in this new universe which raises the dramatic stakes for future big screen voyages.

Mr Nimoy – this could be his best performance in a Star Trek film in my opinion, and much of the film is based around Spock at various ages. I thought they did a fantastic job with his story – really melded (pun intended!) together the various personalities of Spock over the years into the current character Nimoy portrays – a character finally at ease with himself, and BOTH his human and vulcan sides. Was great to see this 40 year character arc come to fruition. Hope we see Nimoy again in the sequal in some capacity…

I actually LOVED the new engineering – it really opened out the ship and made it more believable environment. A living breathing machine unlike the sleek versions we’ve come accustomed to in the past. Lets hope we get to see Scotty work his miracles in there (minus his strange co-worker who was the only part that felt out of place to me in the film) and get a sense of geography of the place next time.

Loved the ship too – something I again wasn’t too sure of from the trailers and photos. Looks much better in action and on the big screen. The ‘money shot’ that takes place throught the rings if saturn was simply breath-taking.

Could go on and on and on but this skeptic has been won over completely.

WELL DONE and THANK YOU to EVERYONE involved with this new movie – Star Trek does indeed live again thanks to all of you.

Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Mugz.

P.S. for the next film, please don’t fal into the tempting trap of revisting other old characters in this new universe. Lets Boldly Go exploring – and see something truly fresh and new. No more space battles next time – they’ve been done to death. Lets truly see what’s out there :)

200. oh_hear_ya - May 12, 2009

Wow – I’m encouraged to see how well it’s doing over seas. Go Trek GO!

201. Jamesb3 - May 12, 2009

Really good article and thanks for the work crunching the numbers and building the charts!

202. I, Mugsy - May 12, 2009

P.S. yes meant to say MANY thanks to all at Trekmovie.com for their peerless coverage of this new Star Trek film (not to mention all the other titbits of news) since it was announced. Truly a website run by fans for the fans – Thanks again

:)

203. JimJ - May 12, 2009

Maybe I’ll be totally wrong, but I seriously think this thing will have legs. It just seems there are so many people I know that truly do plan to see it but haven’t yet. A lot of them plan to go see it this weekend, but not all of them. Word of mouth is running very high, that’ll do nothing but help things.

204. the Quickening - May 12, 2009

#139

I drink bottled water, so I think it’s pretty pure. Lol. Just asking a question. Personal testimonials are nice, but the data doesn’t show significant changes in international markets and/or attracting young viewers, but it’s still early.

#149

It was mentioned in the LA Times. According to it, Paramount and partners have spent almost 300 million on this film. Good luck recouping the investment… their gonna need it.

205. MC1701B - May 12, 2009

No Trek movie has legs. EVER. Go into boxofficemojo again and look at the 2nd week dropoffs for every movie, even Aliens 2–I mean, FC.

If it does $5 million per weekday, the highest of Wolverine’s weekday grosses, that puts it at $96 million for opening week. If it drops ONLY 50% (which won’t happen) each week for four weeks, that’s a total gross of $180 million after a month, This means Paramount’s total gross estimate of $200 million is realistic, if unlikely.

Do the same math on the foreign gross and you get $68–hell, let’s ignore history again, and you’re at $70 million for the run.

So you have a total of $270 million gross for a movie which cost $150 million. YAY! A BIG PROFIT! Better luck next time. The theaters take an average of 45% in rentals. (Used to be 50.) That’s $121.5 million, leaving $148.5 million, putting the movie at a loss in its theatrical run, BEFORE the cost of prints and advertising, whatever astronomical number that is.

Yes, it will make money on video and in ancillary markets, but not enough to offset another $150 in P&A, if that is the correct number.

And that’s the OPTIMISTIC forecast, which won’t happen.

Paramount will either make a sequel on a strict budget, ala TWOK, or they won’t make one at all. And no way in hell JJ directs it. You heard it here first.

206. MC1701B - May 12, 2009

And Casino Royale had no business being on that comparison chart. Bonds make 60-75% of their gross internationally, the OPPOSITE of Star Trek.

207. Denile ain't just a river in Egypt - May 12, 2009

I saw Star Trek the opening night at the 7:30 showing in my city. Unfortunately, the audience was mostly older males in the above 30 crowd. I’d guess that 40% were male and over 40. Most with their wives. I didn’t see many teenagers. We’ll have to see if word of mouth can start to bring in a broader audience.

A lot of my friends are seeing this movie two or three times, but we’re all in the older fan demographic. It would be real shame if it fails to reach the wider audience. However, I wouldn’t be disappointed if it laid the ground work for an even better showing the next time around.

208. JimJ - May 12, 2009

#205-Well, guess what! It made 7.5 million+ on Monday. Box office mojo reported this a while ago. So much for the 5 million like Woverine!!!! This things IS gon na have legs, me thinks!

209. Winston Bowden - May 12, 2009

Awesome number. Exceeded expectations!

210. AJ - May 12, 2009

196:

oh_hear_ya

I am not a movie guy, but know how to sell and market, while evaluating how the marketing affects the selling.

JJ and team did a massive roadshow overseas, and these guys have all already moved on to other projects. I’ve never seen it before. But if we get a cutoff like Wolverine in the second weekend (70%) in the US, we’d just better be sure that International takes it forward.

As the Quickening mentions in #204, if $300m has been spent on marketing, Paramount knows Trek’09 is the ‘investment phase.’ And, payoff and profit be measured in franchise terms, as opposed to on a project-by-project basis.

211. Jan - May 12, 2009

It seems to me that in Germany the poster campaign of the German TV station Kabel1 (“Star Trek Month” with lots of TV specials) was more present than the promotion campaigns of Paramount. That’s somewhat disappointing.

212. the Quickening - May 12, 2009

#210

…And, payoff and profit be measured in franchise terms, as opposed to on a project-by-project basis.

—————————

It’s certainly possible Paramount may be looking at it in those terms.

And for the record, the LA Times article alleges 150 million was spent on marketing (with 140 million spent on production), not 300 million on marketing.

213. RD - May 12, 2009

#212 – let’s just post the link in question for everyone shall we:

http://theenvelope.latimes.com/la-fi-ct-boxoffice11-2009may11,3,3372044.story

A general rule of thumb, a studio will spend roughly half the budget on a large scale marketing campaign per market. In this case US & overseas. The article also does some estimating because Paramount will NEVER release the actual numbers. In reality the LA Times got the budget umber wrong as well. The official budget is $150 million and in reality is likely $160+ million. That means the us marketing budget would typically be around $75 million and the same again overseas ($150 million) and is quite likely more. I’ve never seen a movie as highly promoted as Trek was. Also this number does not include the interest owed on money borrowed to make the movie, easily another $70 million. Plus, of the $79 million Trek has earned only $39.5 million is going back to recoup Paramount’s costs, meaning the studio must make twice as much as it spent in order to recoup.

Having said all that $380+ million is a HUGE amount to recoup before the first profit is made and of course the merchandising will help reduce this number as well). This film must make at least $600 million to realize a decent profit and justify making an equally expensive sequel attractive to the studio. As suggested above, the sequel will almost certainly have a lower budget in order to maximize the future profits.

214. RD - May 12, 2009

#199, While I am happy for you that you liked the movie so much, I think you are kidding yourself if you think the next movie will seriously have fewer space battles. That is the whole point of re-booting Star Trek, as Abrams has said, to make it more like what HE liked about Star Wars. It is the fast action and exciting space battles that put butts into seats. Paramount is not likely to change that formula anytime soon. I am also somewhat mystified that you could be so enamored of the film which was 80% space battles and then make a comment like that. Any fan that loved this movie, had better be completely 100% satisfied with it, because that is what the sequel is going to be. This is the highest grossing Trek to date and Paramount is not about to mess around with that formula. The next one will be bigger, faster, louder and longer space battles. Think Klingon war with the Federation. You don’t seriously think they spent all this money to do “The Cage” the movie did you?

215. ken1w - May 12, 2009

> the sequel will almost certainly have a lower budget in order to maximize the future profits.

Any Star Trek sequel will have a lower budget, because a good portion of the set design (and hopefully some construction), as well as costume design, special effects design, some props, some music scoring, and other production costs are already completed and can be re-used from this first reboot movie. Marketing will also be easier, after the success and popularity of the previous movie.

Casting will probably cost more overall, because the recurring stars will want more money after the success of this movie. JJ and his production team will certainly get more money after the evident success of their first effort.

And regarding “space battles,” the most popular Trek movie before this one was “Wrath of Khan,” and that was full of space battles. Nothing new here. JJ even said TWOK was the Trek film they were trying to emulate. However, I think JJ Abrams is creative and talented enough to try something different, and he probably will…

216. sean - May 12, 2009

Well, I just saw it for the 2nd time and I have to say the film gets better, not worse. Beyond that, I saw it at 11 am on a Tuesday morning and the theatre was 3/4 full with people still clapping, hootin’ & hollerin’ and laughing together. I remember seeing Dark Knight at roughly the same time in its release and I was one of 5 people in the theatre. I’m not saying this reflects the nation as a whole, but it’s certainly good news (and unexpected).

217. Woody - May 12, 2009

I’m with you JimJ. I just saw those Monday numbers of $7.5m. That’s huge. With another move a sure thing, I can’t even imagine how JJ and the team are going to come up with a follow up to match. Also, keeping my fingers crossed for a new show.

218. John Sullivan - May 12, 2009

I think some of these numberse are a little unfair. When it costs $2.25 to see TNG and $8.00 to see Nemesis and 12.00 to watch Imax, any Tribble could figure out that the figures don’t account for the cost of inflation. I think the least expensive Star Trek movie I ever saw was Star Trek III – seen in Italy, for about $1.15. I think the most expensive was a tie between Star Trek IV seen in Yokohama, Japan or Star Trek V seen in Tokyo. Both were about $55 each, but unlike the “let them eat crap” Paramount approach to Americans, where a solid black line appeared for 24 minutes in the BRAND NEW Star Trek film in Pinellas Park Friday or a CONSTANT infestation of gnats and moths over the lens for an Imax presentation Saturday in downtown Tampa, Paramount made sure that Star Trek films there were delivered with true professionalism – when seen in Japan. And in Japan, you get a program (like the kind that used to be handed out at rock concerts before promotors started charging $25.00 for them) that is a lifetime keepsake, as well as other giveaways that aren’t offered to Americans. Hell, in America, they think so little of you that they charge you $12.00 for popcorn and a paper cup full of ice and a little Coca Cola. And in Japan, when you pay $55.00, the popcorn and everything else is on the house.

219. John Sullivan - May 12, 2009

… and dear webmasters, please stop calling the Star Trek movie seen in Imax(R) theatres an Imax film. There was no improvement in resolution or presentation over the 70mm film. The source was 70mm film the edges were cut, and it was “blown up” by a zoom to produce the dimensions of an Imax film, but by no measure was this really an Imax film. It was a panned, “zoom-in” version of the 70-mm film, and as I have said before, save your Imax experience for the real space shots being taken WITH IMAX cameras (Star Trek did not use them) that are in space aboard Atlantis right now.

220. U.F.P. - May 12, 2009

well ant tribble can figure out that after you 12.oo for popcorn 12.00 for a ticket it cost you 31.00 for your program . hope it was worth it. i am spending the extra 31.oo you paid on the dvd and paperback. plus i have my ticket stub to put in the case. i win.lol

221. mjmjr91 - May 12, 2009

I saw the movie over the weekend in Delaware. Lol there was a great cameo in the “please turn off your cell phone” commercial before the film here, none other than Enterprise’s DOMINIC KEATING!!!

222. U.F.P., $Version=0 - May 12, 2009

wow my syntax sucks. i agree about IMAX I am going to reg. theater this friday. Plus the sound in Saco Maine IMAX must be being installed n ext tuesday/LOL/

223. U.F.P. - May 12, 2009

205 8 million dvds @ 20 bucks apiece =

224. TomBot3000 - May 12, 2009

Well, if we are going to have more Star Trek(s) like JJ’s vision, then I guess the next fill will be an all out Star War between the Fed’s and the Klingons. They will be mighty stirred up after losing 47 warbirds. The Klingon Emperor will be very sore indeed. ;-)
Are we still flagging SPOILERS? Or is just assumed open season? Anyway, possible spoilers ahead for you.
I’ve seen the new Trek twice, and I don’t seriously think my thoughts on it are original or will sway anyone. It’s a pretty decently fun space fantasy stretched over the “bones” of an old friend. I liked most of the cast, especially Bruce Greenwood as Pike. For me, it did a better job of keeping interest over the whole of the film than Batman Begins, which started out great, and fumbled at the end for me, personally. But where it fails in my eyes, is being true to it’s heritage, in aping Star Wars. I don’t dig the Starships being like StarDestroyers, Phasers like Blasters, or immense mining ships from the future not painted a bright red! ;-) Red matter looks like some blood gobule, perhaps the tear of a god? And if the Enterprise is at high warp trying to escape a black hole, won’t jettisoning the core kind of eliminate your warp capability? Instant poof, even before the dubious detonation salvation? I’m sure answers will be most vociferous. Of all the changes that are either irksome, or just amusing, the one that really rankles me, is the Enterprise, exterior; I just do not dig it. You squint and you got basically the idea, but when you un-squint, it’s all melty, wrong looking, stretched between too many compromises. Trust me though, I’m not angry about it. When the styles and tastes of the POP change, you know that you are at the whims of forces beyond your control.

225. AJ - May 13, 2009

A lot of good points here, but Trek is not breaking any records.

The marketing overseas has been brilliant, but it’s not enough to get people to the cinemas. It needs time.

The initial film may have to take a loss on the promotional side to pay for the future success of the franchise.

PP will massage the books to make sure ‘Trek’s’ numbers justify a sequel to the shareholders, but the A&P is definitely being front-loaded.

226. roy - May 13, 2009

#2, Along the lines of taking stock, I wonder what has happened to Rick Berman these days. He’s been laying very low for the last few years. After this past weekend, he must be really feeling embarassed after the fact that JJ Abrams Star Trek movie has put the franchise back on track as somewhat of a bona-fide success in comparison to Berman’s last two Star Trek produced movies. Thanks JJ for making a wonderful film that appeals to everybody.

227. MC1 Doug - May 13, 2009

Interesting. This says something about this movie’s legs. I cannot recall people talking about repeat visits to see the movie since Star Trek IV.

I plan to see it at least two more times (one being in an IMAX theatre).

Way to go, JJ and crew!

228. sean - May 13, 2009

#224

They were propelled by the shockwave created when the warp core was detonated. At that point, they were not traveling at warp (as was obvious from the lack of warp FX). It just pushed them far enough away that they could escape under sublight speeds. No issues there.

229. sean - May 13, 2009

#228

I should point out this clearly would have been a subspace shockwave, since we know you can’t have a traditional shockwave in space ;)

230. Illogical - May 13, 2009

Saw it again last night at Imax, this makes the 5th time….two times at Imax, and three times on the DLP screen here in Ft. Lauderdale! Like it more each time!
By the way, all weekend showings at the Ft. Lauderdale Imax were sold out, as well as the 9PM showing last night, which is not bad for a Tuesday.

231. Trekcast Sci-Fi Supplement 16: | Trekcast - May 13, 2009

[...] we update you with the latest on whats happening with the new movie and what it’s done at the box office as well as our personal reviews, and what we thought of the film after we have had a chance to [...]

232. Grand Lunar - May 14, 2009

Good to see that “Star Trek” is raking in (or should that be ‘beaming in’?) the numbers.
I doubt that “Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian” will be much competion for it.

Now, if only I can find an inexpensive theater to see the movie in!

233. Anthony O'Leary - May 27, 2009

You can’t be serious. This film is not Star Trek. I have seen it twice and i am still devasted by it.
Firstly, anyone who loves the series would know that Gene Roddenberry would not have approved of Vulcan being destroyed. Vulcan is the soul of the Star Trek universe. This new timeline (if it is accepted) negates 40 years of continuity.
The attacks on Rick Berman are a joke. He worked with Gene on the development of the TGN and Gene knew of the plans for Deep Space 9.
He led a team that gave us hours of the best Trek. If in doubt watch again Generations and First Contact.
Secondly, this new film has so many links to Star Wars i am surprised that George Lucas hasn’t sued:
Young Kirk / Anakin in car / podracer.
Bar scenes – New Hope
Snow attacks – Hoth monster / kirk monster.
Spock / Yoda links
Battle scenes – Return Jedi. etc

I just hope that people who love Star Trek can retake the franchise and bring it back to watch Gene imagined. Not just a film that rips of star wars.

Live Long and Prosper

234. RD - May 28, 2009

Star Trek franchise (domestic)
Inflation adjusted
Gross ($Millions)

ST: The Motion Picture
$239.1

ST IV: The Voyage Home
$212.3

ST II: The Wrath of Khan
$192.3

ST III: The Search For Spock
$163.2

ST: First Contact
$149.5

ST: Generations
$129.9

ST: The Undiscovered Country
$127.7

ST: Insurrection
$107.5

ST: The Final Frontier
$94.0

ST: Nemesis
$53.4

235. Homer Walde at okpayit.com - March 31, 2012

I needed to thank you for this excellent read!! I certainly loved every little bit of it. I have you book-marked to check out new things you post…

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.