Star Trek Ends 4th Week With $320M Globally + Passes Another Trek Milestone June 5, 2009
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Paramount, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
On Thursday Star Trek came in fourth place with $1.23M in domestic sales, bringing its domestic total up to $214.4M. This, combined with its total international sales of $105.9, brings Star Trek’s four week global gross to $320.3M. More box office details below, including some predictions on what Star Trek can expect for its fifth weekend.
Star Trek’s total domestic gross is now $214.4M. It’s fourth week total was $17.7M, which is between Superman Returns ($11.0) and Iron Man ($30.5), but fairly close to the fourth weeks of Transformers ($20.4) and Batman Begins ($17.2). Here is an update of the chart we have done for the last two weeks, comparing the domestic performance of Star Trek to other recent ‘franchise reboots’ and big summer movies.
Star Trek also brought in $12.8 in its fourth week of overseas sales, bringing the total overseas take to to $105.9M. This brings Star Trek’s three week total global gross $320.3M. Although the opening in Japan boosted Trek’s fourth week of international sales, the film is still underperforming other Hollywood tentpoles overseas.
Weekend predictions – battle for 5th place + Mexico open
One surprise for Thursday box office was that Star Trek came in fourth place, behind Up, Night at the Museum 2, and Terminator Salvation but ahead of both Angels & Demons and the Sam Raimi horror film Drag Me To Hell (Star Trek was only $200k behind Terminator). Two new films open this weekend (The Hangover and Land of the Lost), which are expected to share the top four spots with NATM2 and Up. But BoxOffice.com and BoxOffice Guru are both predicting that Trek, Drag and Terminator 4 will all end up in the $7.0-7.5M range and so it could be that Trek could end up in the top 5 in its fifth weekend.
Star Trek should have a decent weekend internationally as it is its second weekend in Japan and first weekend in Mexico. After this weekend Star Trek only has two more markets to open (Indonesia on June 10th and India on June 12th).
Viacom Chief Talks Up Trek (Again)
Last week we reported how Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman touted the performance and future of the Trek franchise to investors and analysts, and this week he did the same for shareholders of Viacom stock. THR reports the following from the annual Viacom shareholder meeting:
Overall, Dauman argued that despite recurring TV ratings challenges over the past couple of years, which have led to several changes in programming strategy of Viacom networks, and a need to rebuild the Paramount film unit, the firm has under his leadership already succeeded in new franchises and kept existing ones strong.
For example, he pointed to enduring programming such as “Sponge Bob Square Pants,” which celebrates its 10th anniversary, and “South Park,” plus the recently reinvented and rejuvenated “Star Trek” franchise and the MTV Movie Awards, whose ratings were up 92% from last year.
Star Trek passes another Trek milestone – 2nd highest adjusted gross
On Wednesday Star Trek passed another franchise milestone by topping Star Trek IV ($212.3m) to become the second highest domestic grossing Star Trek film, after adjusting for inflation. Star Trek The Motion Picture has the highest adjusted total at $239.1M.
Star Trek would need another $25M to get to the top of the Star Trek chart. Although sales are certainly slowing down, getting into the $240M range seems doable (but not guaranteed). Regardless, that milestone may not be achieved until July or August as Star Trek wraps up its run. Of course Star Trek is certain to make much more than TMP in the home market and with merchandising/promotional deals, which are a much bigger part of the overall picture now than they were in 1979.
Loading ...
Comments»
Sweet!
I know no one is talking “Official” greenlit sequel… but with the Viacom CEO trumpeting Trek, i cannot see how it won’t happen. I predict in a few more weeks we will get an official date for release/principal photography.
The last graph is very telling. I am only ever concerned about adjusted B.O. (i.e. ticket sales). Star trek has been in slow decline for years – it wasn’t just Nemesis. This movie has single-handedly brought back the franchise. For that, JJ is to be commended.
Wow. Trek is realy on fire. I have seen trek only 9 times so far. Trek 09 is simply the best and if the court can top this one then the next trek will take in 500 million. Oh Last!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think that I am going to see it again this weekend, I love the film. Go Star Trek!
C’mon, everybody, let’s push the box-office take even higher! Can’t we all go see it just one more time??
I think the lesson that has to be learned from this is that whether you like the movie or hated it, this box office take is guaranteeing us the re-vitalization of the Star Trek franchise. I think a lot of people (well maybe not a LOT) would rather Trek die, so they can enjoy it in the basement alone without their expectations being destroyed and the rape of their childhood commence.
So it cost something like 160 mil to make.
I heard rule of thumb is a film’s gross has to double it’s budget to break even.
OK, fine, I’ll see it again. You really have to twist my arm…(sarcastic tone)
I am totally confident this will become the most attended Star Trek movie ever. Take that, Rick Berman!
A new TV series based on the voyages of the USS Kelvin and crew please, most enjoyable part of the whole movie was the beginning
Svavar, i really like that idea…. But i don’t know if i could enjoy the show knowing almost everyone would die some time in the future…
I think we need a show based in the new continuity but with a new ship/crew
they wouldn’t have to die, just make it in the old timeline
I’ve got at least 3 more viewings to go this summer. I promised my kids I would take them individually with me so that we could have a daddy’s day at the movies. This summer is going to be expensive as there are a lot of films my family wants to see in the theater.
I swear to god… if Tuvok died in the vulcan implosion… I WILL LITERALLY KILL JJ ABRAMS !
12. Svavar – June 5, 2009
they wouldn’t have to die, just make it in the old timeline
Yeah… but the object is to have NEW fans, not just placate the old ones. I think that would be confusing, as they should probably stay within the framework they have created.
After only 28 days, ST09 has the 2nd highest gross in franchise history. I wonder what the adjusted gross for TMP was after only 4 weeks. I think ST09 will break the $239million mark in 2-3 weeks.
In any case, surpassing the most mainstream-friendly (IMO) film in the history of the franchise is in itself quite an achievement. Since TVH was quite a bit cheaper to make, this is really a statement about the future viability of the franchise more than anything else.
I am convinced that this film opened alot of eyes and broke down some of the barriers among mainstream moviegoers with regard to Trek (at least Kirk/Spock/McCoy Trek). The dvd release should do even more to arouse some interest.
I think that the sequel will likely do even better at the box-office—and since alot of the sets, props, etc. can be recycled from the first film, it should draw a bigger profit margin as well.
Just read the Lost Era novel “The Art of the Impossible” and just really started realizing that I prefer the Prime Trek universe so much more than this new film. Don’t get me wrong, I was entertained by it, but I think I’ll just enjoy what’s come before and consider that the real Trek. This new “universe” is just an interesting side show to me…albeit a very entertaining one.
Star Trek opens here http://www.ncbeaches.com/OuterBanks/Manteo/Activities/MovieTheaters/PioneerTheatre/ tonight! Most Friday nights the theater is usually almost full.
My Life in Ruins, starring Nia Vardalos, is also opening this weekend, but it ain’t gonna do much business. It’ll be lucky if it gets $5m. Interestingly, Ruins was once set to open against Star Trek on May 8th.
Anthony, will the Trek news slow down now that the movie has been going for awhile? Or will Trek news pick up if we start hearing about a Trek TV series soon? I wonder if Trek will just stick to the movie side anyway? Would Paramount wonder about oversaturating Trek again like they did in the 90’s and just have Trek in movie form only?
I am going again tonight. It finally arrived at my local theater.
#2: The sequel was approved by Paramount execs weeks before the movie even premiered.
This has been discussed many a time and in different posts on this web site. Variety, the entertainment arts news magazine, reported this fact as well in early March (see my repost of the link which I posted a week or so ago)
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118001885.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
@17
I could not agree more. There is one thing i don’t understand, when has traveling back in time ever created an alternate timeline co-existing with the old one? There have been many timetravels but i don’t recall any of them creating an alternate universe… Has anyone considered that when the Borg assimilated earth in First Contact it directly changed the 24th century? Or how about in City on the edge of forever when McCoy went back in time, suddenly the federation doesn’t exist?
I’m fine with keeping the alternate timeline in the movies but i would prefer the old timeline in the next TV-series
#3 – The graph proved something I’ve been saying all along… When Star Trek films weren’t competing with a currently-in-production Trek TV series, they did very well. When they were, the films’ box-office suffered. The lesson’s clear. If they want the films to keep doing blockbuster business, don’t go back to TV simultaneously.
That said…
#12, 17, 23- Count me in agreement, as well.
#23—”There is one thing i don’t understand, when has traveling back in time ever created an alternate timeline co-existing with the old one?”
That is only in the offscreen commentary of one of the writers. MWI/QM is not actually something which appears on screen—therefore it isn’t canon.
Canonically speaking, the “prime timeline” actually ceased to exist when the Narada attacked the USS Kelvin.
Hope it gets there as I think that SW:ROTS, Transformers and Iron Man were all a pile of SHITE !!!!
Will be watching Terminator Salvation tomorrow for the first time and Star Trek for the second time right on after.
Happy Weekending all (”,)
Lets keep Trek off the box for the time being too…………………..
Prime timeline is still intact for ever – New Alternate Timeline/Reality is just an other timeline/reality that resides along side an infinite number of other ones.
Every possible combination of possibilities exist but just different alternate realities.
#24—”The graph proved something I’ve been saying all along… When Star Trek films weren’t competing with a currently-in-production Trek TV series, they did very well. When they were, the films’ box-office suffered. The lesson’s clear. If they want the films to keep doing blockbuster business, don’t go back to TV simultaneously.”
While I wouldn’t advocate a new series right now—-the “clear lesson” is nothing of the sort. That really amounts to nothing but circumstantial evidence, and not any real proof of anything.
There have only really been two well-marketed, big-budget Star Trek features, and neither was released while a television series was on the air in anything but syndication. Until that happens, this is really nothing more than a shoestring theory which may or may not have any validity to it.
I don’t completely dismiss it as one possible factor, but as such, it pales in comparison to an individual film’s entertainment value and the hype surrounding it, IMO.
#28—”Prime timeline is still intact for ever – New Alternate Timeline/Reality is just an other timeline/reality that resides along side an infinite number of other ones.”
You are free to imagine that Star Trek’s treatement of time travel has been retconned, but you’ll find no evidence of that in any canonical material. Bob Orci can talk all he wants about MWI/QM, but even he acknowledges that the film is completely ambiguous about it—and therefore not contradictory to ST’s more classical treatment of time travel in the past.
If TNG’s “Parallels” had been the last entry into Trek’s time travel collection prior to this one—MWI/QM might have some canonical legs on which to stand, but it wasn’t…and so it doesn’t.
If it ain’t on screen….it ain’t canon!
@23 & 25
Have you guys heard of the “Mirror Universe”?
Trek has shown that two universes can co-exist.
25. CLosettrekker: ‘That is only in the offscreen commentary of one of the writers. MWI/QM is not actually something which appears on screen—therefore it isn’t canon.’
TNG. Parallels. Nuff said.
#32—”TNG. Parallels. Nuff said.”
Afraid not. There have been several time travel entries since that episode (including one on film), none of which support MWI/QM.
#31—”Have you guys heard of the “Mirror Universe”?
Trek has shown that two universes can co-exist.”
To me, likening it to the MU is pretty weak, since the MU has nothing to do with time travel.
#6. Harry Ballz
NO!!
#8 – I’ve seen the figure in the $140-$150M range. Also, rule of thumb theories are just that – a theory. Doesn’t make it true. I feel pretty confident that this film is already well into the profit side. No fancy numbers to back me up, just a well-educated guess.
I am also not in favor of a new TV series, just yet. Let’s let the 3-film cycle play out (all the principles were signed for 3 films) and see where Trek stands at that point. I somewhat agree that the oversaturation of Trek hurt the franchise during the ’90’s to ‘02. And the weakness of Enterprise (almost) killed it. A famous entertainer once said the key to success was to “always leave them wanting more”. Not like they’ve seen it all, or worse, too much.
#34…they never explained HOW the Mirror Universe came into being. They only showed that it was there and that you could travel back and forth. Who’s to say that it wasn’t split off in the past, due to some meddling time traveller?
Sounds like a good subject for a novel or a comic series: “Star Trek Mirror Universe – Origins.”
#36
I agree with this line of thinking…. Much as I want to see another Star Trek on the small screen I am willing to wait for these movies to run their course…
#34
“To me, likening it to the MU is pretty weak, since the MU has nothing to do with time travel.”
Perhaps not but the existence of at least one parallel universe has long been established. So it is not a new concept to Trek…
#6, #35 – OF COURSE!! You don’t even have to twist my arm, at least once more…… I think it was important to show Paramount that Trek fans WILL support a quality Trek movie, with their wallets, and we have. A little more emphasis wouldn’t hurt! Just skip one double-grande-latte-mocha whatever and support Trek instead!! ;-)
#12, 17, and 24, I’m with you guys. :)
#34…they never explained HOW the Mirror Universe came into being.
I was under the impression it happened when Cochrane shot the Vulcans during First Contact. We can assume that up to that point events for both universes were “common”.
I think we should pick a weekend day and everyone agrees to go to see the movie again on that day and bring a friend that has not yet seen the movie. Let’s push ST09 to 250 mil.
I think there is a reason we haven’t seen an Iron Man series, a new Batman series, a new Spiderman series, etc.
The only exception has been the Terminator series, TSCC. It has since been cancelled, and the newest film has been a major disappointment at the box office.
Star Trek has now moved into the blockbuster, every 2-year, tentpole category. It is no longer a TV series, at least a live action prime time network or cable channel series. Now an animated show based on the idea using peripheral characters aimed at kids might have a shot! It’s never a bad idea to cultivate new Trek fans in time for the next movie…. ;-)
I hear people talk about this movie all the time. When’s the last time THAT happened with Trek? Oh yeah. Never. Not a month after its release.
Such a good time to be a Trekkie!
NC Trekker – June 5, 2009
Star Trek opens here http://www.ncbeaches.com/OuterBanks/Manteo/Activities/MovieTheaters/PioneerTheatre/ tonight! Most Friday nights the theater is usually almost full.
Dude. Where you live is one of my favorite places in the world. Hell, THE favorite.
BTW, someone mentioned Land of the Lost, maybe it was in the article. I’ll be very surprised if this film does well. I saw the trailers in the theater, and the groans were audible, including mine. Will Farrell can be funny, but he can also be annoying. I was annoyed during the trailer, much like the SNL skits that are pushed back to 12:40 as time fillers. The critics hate it (my local newspaper critic gave it a “D”) and Rotten Tomatoes has it at 23%. So maybe a chance for Trek to make some hay this weekend. I can hope, right?
Star Trek is indeed Living Long and Prospering!
Don’t forget: there is still the money to be made from DVD/Blu-Ray sales.
Ok. I challenge everyone here on trek Movie and you to Anthony to go see Trek at least once this weekend. Who is up to the Challenge.
I am truly excited that Star Trek is doing so well at the box office. I do however hope that it does not cement the notion that Star Trek is all about action. We all know it can be so much more, and rightly should.
I did enjoy the current movie, but I am hoping Orci holds true to his comments about wanting to inject some more moral dilemmas into the next one.
CBS has to green-light a Trek cartoon. Every successful scifi/superhero film property has one.
I think I need to point out that several hundred people did survive the Kelvin. Just slap the name on a new ship and call it NCC whatever A. So have the Adventures of the Kelvin with a new Captain and First Officer is still possible.
#51 sebimeyer -
Agreed 100%.
It was a decent movie. Although… it could have been a great movie. There are parts of that movie that are believable and generally, except for Scotty, I do like the character development. But there are way too many logical errors and scientiffically it’s just hair raising. Roddenberry never went into scientific details, for a good reason. He knew if he wouldn’t get it right, people wouldn’t be satisfied. Well, I believe JJ Abrams had other priorities than making this movie believable. If his primary goal was to make big money and shine in the limelight (which a producer in my opinion never should) then this movie is a full success for him.
To me it’s not. I don’t love it. I enjoyed myself reasonably. I mean, I wasn’t bored. Okay. But I don’t feel the need to ever see it again and basically I think there were a lot of cheap laughs in this movie whereas in the series the comedy was always in the situation and the actors always played it straight.
Simon Pegg for example was way off with his portrayal of Scotty. Probably not his fault, I think he’s a great actor. The greatest, as a matter of fact. Unfortunately, his accent was very authenticly Glaswegian, but I truly never thought that Doohan’s Scotty sounded Glaswegian at all – he sounded more like Sean Connery who comes from Edinburgh where they speak a very educated Scots. I wish Simon Pegg and the writers had not chosen to completely redefine the role of Scotty. To me it wasn’t Scotty at all – it was some clown with stupid hat who has a horrible young brat from Glasgow accent and is a technically inclined freak. The Scotty I grew up with was a gentleman and an officer, a red-blooded human with outstanding engineering skills, who had a wonderful burr in his voice.
As for the logic… I really don’t understand this Nero thing. There are too many open questions. Why was Nero there when Romulus was destroyed. He must have just found out about it and that he lost his wife and he had the sense to find out immediately who was responsible for it and confronted Spock ?? Why did Spock inject the antimatter when Romulus was already destroyed? And why did Spock and Nero travel twice through a black hole and came through without the slightest problem and at the end the black hole destroys his ship and almost destroys the Enterprise? How come that young Spock decides to leave Kirk behind on the exact planet where old Spock was left by Nero? And oh what conincidence that Scotty should be there too.
Sorry but the story line was never fully devolped and thought through and that shows.
Well, all I have to say in the end is this, it could have been so much more. Maybe the Star Trek team should get rid of the main problem here. I think the next movie should happen without JJ Abrams.
The writers are very gifted and can do a fine job, if only you let them. Well and the cast is good. Pegg too. Wouldn’t change him. When he is allowed to play Scotty with typical straight humor the way he played Nicolas Angel in Hot Fuzz then I think he can be a Scotty that is different too but lovable. The Scotty in Star Trek XI unfortunately was not.
If another part is made I would watch it, as long as it’s not JJ Abrams. I don’t want another disappointment and now I know, he does not understand Star Trek. Orci does, the other writers do, the cast does but not JJ. JJ only understand how do I get to glory the fast way and how do I make a lot of money while doing that. He should do that with other projects. Projects that don’t mean so very much to people.
Pointing out that the mirror universe co-exists with the prime universe proves nothing. My point is that changes in the timeline due to timetravel in Star Trek has never resulted in an alternate co-existing timeline before now. Orci and Kurtzman claim they are following the preset rules of timetravel in Star Trek…. that’s not true. I don’t recall changes in the timeline ever creating an alternate universe, that’s one of the reasons we have the temporal prime directive, to prevent any harmful changes in the timeline. Yesterdays Enterprise… City on the edge of forever… First Contact… changes in time effect the prime universe, they do not create an alternate universe without changing the original.
I am not surprised its doing so well. I saw it for the third time on Tuesday night, and was just as entertained as the first.
Also, the theatre was crowded. Probably 75 to 80 pecent of capacity, even though it was Tuesday. I know I’ll go at least two more times.
I must take exception, though, to those who say this movie was all about action.
It’s true that the movie was not as heavy handed with a message like IV or V or VI were. However, didn’t anyone other than me pick up on the anti-war sentiment in the movie, especially the wrongess of a “first strike” mentality? Am I the only one that found the torture scene comparible to the waterboarding debate today? How about the themes of self sacrifice for the greater good, and redemption? One could even go so far as to say that Spock Prime was a nod to the great value that senior citizens give our society. What about the racism that Quinto’s Spock encountered on Vulcan, and the rejection of it by him as well as Sarek?
I feel that like a lot of art, this movie presented these things in a way that was not obvious. People can choose to see them or not. However, as a fan of 30 plus years, knowing what Star Trek represents, these things were apparent to me. I am surprised when I hear people who claim to be life liong fans say that this was only an action movie. Go back and see it a couple more times, and maybe you see what I saw.
#56
Is it not both? They entered an alternate reality in a past time frame. This also occurred on Enterprise in the Mirror universe episode when the Defiant was a ship from an alternate future time frame.
nit, nit, nit = pick, pick, pick.
Now we’re reduced to nuances of the Scottish dialect! Priceless!
Did we watch the same movie? Or for that matter, the same OS? Scotty, in this movie, was a younger version of the original. Throughout the OS and the movies, Scotty was used as a comedic element that showed his brilliance and intelligence to save the day, the ship, the world, etc.
You pick holes in the story, yet praise the writers. You praise Pegg, yet condemn his performance. You condemn Abrams, yet ignore the critics and fans that love this film. Again, did we see the same movie?
60. As a comedic element, yes. As SOLELY a comedic element, not until TFF. And we all know how well-loved that film is.
#57 – I totally agree. This movie was full of messages and lessons, if you’re open to them. It was MUCH more than an action/adventure film, unless that’s all you saw. The action was great, but what resonated with me was the father/father figure /son/ son figure /destiny /personal choice of destiny theme.
George Kirk/James Kirk (sacrifice/destiny)
Chistopher Pine/James Kirk (destiny is your choice)
Sarek/Spock (destiny is your choice)
Spock Prime/ James Kirk (your destiny is heroic, if you choose it)
Sarek/Spock (transporter room scene that gave me chills, love is possible, even for a Vulcan)
Spock Prime/Spock (I am not our father)
That’s the movie I saw, anyway! In a 2 hour action/adventure flick no less! Quite an accomplishment in my book!! That is MY Star Trek!
#60 – I guess that message was meant for me. I think I stated the same thing. Scotty is that eccentric, funny, ireverrant, smart-ass genius that we all know in our own lives. The one that we call on when the chips are down. The one that sometimes surprises himself with his own brilliance. And makes fun of it. I agree, TFF made him a buffoon. This film does not.
#61 – very cool!
I also got chills during the transporter room scene. I didn’t pick up on the “love is possible” element, but I see it now. Thanks for sharing!
Live long and prosper and boldly go!
57:
Yes, this film finally stops dispensing its “morals” via spelling them out to the audience. There’s no “Guinan” to sit down and discuss the problems, laying them out for the 18-24 demographic.
Dealing with loss, choosing that day when you change your life by taking a risk, choosing trust over enmity even when logic says you should not, but instinct says oherwise….
These are all themes, but they didn’t toss in one per episode and hammer them to death. The movie says to the audience: “you figure it out.”
The film also eschews that mirage of hyper-intelligence by dispensing with technobabble as the reason for, or solution to, a problem. It was always inappropriate to TOS anyway.
You’re talking about revenues here, but it may make a comparable profit…? TMP cost a lot, but so did ST, and it also had massive marketing campaigns. In the end, it may be a wash. We should get some numbers on that.
#37 and #32Re: The origin of the Mirror Universe
While certainly not canon, go to http://www.StarshipFarragut.com and download Episode 2 “For Want of a Nail”.
USS Farragut goes to Solan Prime where they have technology to see into the past. The technology interferes with the transporter and Captain Carter’s landing party find themselves on Earth Dec. 24 1776 on the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware river where they run into General Washington and the Continental Army.
I won’t give it all away but it’s not over when the Farragut leaves orbit at the end and therein lies your answer to the origin of the Mirror Universe!
Download the DVD .iso and use an upconverting DVD player to watch it on a big screen and you’ll be amazed!
14, no you won’t
How about we get a cartoon series and Direct to DVD stories with the TV casts?
Like another post said, every major movie from last summer has a cartoon series on TV and some of them are pretty good, like Iron Man.
#10… I agree completely!!! USS Kelvin TV Show without a doubt. That is one strong crew!!! I want more Capt Robau. I am going to watch that beginning over and over when I get the DVD. Just Awesome!!!
Never understood how TMP made so much money and then they decided to give Harve Bennett 1/4 the budget to make TWOK?? Not that it hurt the film but I am certainly glad there is a new way of thinking in terms of budgeting and support towards Trek (not the spinoffs that’s another story I care not to discuss)
#23
“There have been many timetravels but i don’t recall any of them creating an alternate universe…”
Well, they did, you even mentioned two examples:
In First Contact, suddenly they saw the Earth was assimilated by the Borg. In City on the Edge of Forever, suddenly there was no Enterprise above. Both of these are examples of alternative universes. Luckily in both stories there was both a convenient immunity to the effects of whatever change had occurred and a means to travel back in time themselves.
In both stories the objective driving the plot of the particular story was to undo the events that changed history. The crews went back in time themselves and prevented a dramatic change in their timeline from occuring. Technically speaking the universe they created in doing so is not the universe they were from, it is just more or less identical. Perhaps all the major events played out the same in both universes, but who knows what minor changes they made.
The new Star Trek was budgeted at $150 mil because the studio recognized J.J. Abrams’ crowd-pleasing creative brilliance. No way would they have given that kind of budget to Berman.
70:
Garth:
Sometimes budget expectations are set too high by corporations. Anthony should throw Star Wars (ANH) into his “Trek” chart up top, and you’ll see it pulled in $1.billion and change domestically (adjusted) in initial release. It was in cinemas for almost two years as I recall.
I am sure Paramount’s low-end revenue expectations were far higher than $239m, and the Board most likely, because it was profitable, approved a recoup of expected earnings by going cheap on the next one, and taking each sequel case by case.
71
I prefer to think of Trek along the lines of a Multiverse, where everything filmed ‘exists’ in its own timeline.
Many quantum theorists believe that an infinite number of universes actually coexist in ‘our’ space with a ‘new’ universe being created at the crux of every decision that is made/not made by every being in the Multiverses. There is actually good science behind this theory which is far beyond my High School educated mentality.
69
The screen flashing ‘Terminated’ was sadly the end of Robau’s brief time in the Trek Multiverse. Maybe he had a better ending in the TOS Multiverse Timeline.
70
Paramount did not make an error in underfunding TWOK. After TMP hit the theaters, there was limited, if any Cable rights, a modest sale to the TV Networks, no VHS or DVD, very little to market after the original ballyhoo died down. TMP was a marginal property at best.
With red ink running like blood at a slasher movie, Paramount asked Bennett to make good Trek, on time and on a less wasteful budget. Bennett accepted those terms and made it work for 3 more very good movies with tight scripts, modest FX and sets and short shooting schedules. Just like the Original Series did.
Just came home from seeing it a third time. Really holds up to closer scrutiny. REALLY want to see it exceed $250M!
72:
Spocko:
I think JJ came cheap, IMHO. Berman’s track record (running 25 seasons of Trek + 4 films) has far more depth than Abrams.’ He made a ton of money for his bosses, but it went south at the end after 18 years.
JJ had one blockbuster under his belt as a director prior to Trek (MI3), plus was making great creative waves with Felicity, Alias and Lost (and now Fringe) as a creator/writer/producer. He also had two canceled series under his belt, and has LOST as a shining star,and what is considered middling success with Cloverfield.
It’s clear why he jumped on “Trek.” LOST is almost done, Fringe is doing nicely, but he wants to direct. His salary for Trek is probably based on revenue numbers, with a huge raise for Star Trek 2011, should the sequel be greenlit. And now he is a real Hollywood director after a successful sophomore attempt.
It’s no wonder Spielberg visited the set. Paramount probably sent him over to make sure JJ knows what the hell he’s doing.
Obviously he does.
A new series with the ship the Kelvin with the crew from this movie would be awesome. I loved the captain and Kirk’s dad would be a great first officer. Plus some cameo’s with Pike. That would make a great TV series.
Saw the movie for a third time tonite; the theatre was at 90% capacity; this movie has strong legs baby, strong legs indeed.
I added to the pile of $$ tonight… making it 3 times viewed. Still love that opening.
Attention all “Old Trek” fans: Buy the DVDs, watch the reruns. Return to your basements, kiss your parents good night, and leave the future to us, who embrace JJ and the wonderful job he did of rehabilitating an ailing franchise and breathing live back into characters we love. What has passed has passed, move, or live in the past, but please stop whining about it. The new movie IS the standard for Trek now, and the next film(s) will be set in this “new” timeline with THIS crew (and apparently) these actors. All good. Can’t make “Old Trek” anymore, Bones and Scotty are gone, and the rest of the crew has aged beyond the ability to be believable. Embrace change!
Keep rolling on, NewTrek!!!
Having boldly stepped into the Blu-ray world this week (I got the Spider-Man Trilogy for free with my £149 Sony Blu-ray player and have, naturally, ordered Star Trek Season One on Blu-ray from Amazon) I fully intend to contribute to the new film’s profits by buying the Blu-ray release of that film!
Great to see a Star Trek film doing so well!
Star Trek is doing great domestically and it is 50% change it will surpassed TMP. However it seems to be difficult to find accurate number for TMP domestic gross adjusted for 2009 inflation. Trek Movie site says $239.1 million but i have seen other numbers on other sites that is closer to $241 million and other as high as $244 million and low as $235 million. Also regarding TMP worldwide gross i have seen numbers from $398 million to $414 million.
This darned movie is costing me money.
Tickets. For three showings, with multiple family members.
Soundtrack. I dropped $9 on the Amazon soundtrack download – and its the only thing about the movie I don’t like.
Novelization: Another $8 so my wife could get free shipping on another book from Amazon.
And you know what’s coming? In about six months, probably $30 on the BluRay release of the film….
…and then about $300 on a BluRay player to stinking watch it.
Don’t these guys know we’re in a recession?? They just HAD to go out and produce this irresisible movie, dang it…. :D
#56—”My point is that changes in the timeline due to timetravel in Star Trek has never resulted in an alternate co-existing timeline before now. ”
And canonically speaking, that still hasn’t happened. People whose primary concern is clinging to the notion that the Prime timeline is still moving along can feel free to embrace MWI/QM (and therefore the ‘retconning’ of the treatment of time travel through over 40 years of Star Trek).
However, MWI/QM is not canon.
“Orci and Kurtzman claim they are following the preset rules of timetravel in Star Trek…. ”
Actually, they have claimed nothing of the sort, except to point towards TNG’s “Parallels” as a prior canon entry supporting MWI/QM. The problem with that is that “Parallels” not only contradicts the treatment of time travel in all prior stories, but in all subsequent stories as well.
The effects of time travel in ST09 are (canonically) no different from the effects of time travel as depicted in the 52 episodes/films depicting time travel prior to ST09.
The reason it is canonically no different is that nothing within the onscreen story suggests otherwise.
Bob Orci’s off-screen take on time travel and modern theories regarding Quantum Mechanics (in particular, the “Many Worlds Interpretation”) is interesting, but that doesn’t make it canon. He could have made it so—-but he didn’t. On the contrary, it is intentionally ambiguous.
“…they do not create an alternate universe without changing the original.”
And unless that notion is supported on screen (which it certainly isn’t in ST09)—-that doesn’t happen here either.
Your concerns are based upon the non-canon commentary of one of the writers, when in fact, what constitutes canon is no different now than it was a year ago (and never has that included internet posts, however fascinating they might be).
#60—”As SOLELY a comedic element, not until TFF. And we all know how well-loved that film is.”
How is he solely a comedic element? Did he not save the ship in the end with his own uncanny display of ingenuity?
I seem to recall that it was his proposed (and executed) solution—-ejecting the warp core and detonating it—-which collapsed the black hole and and created the speparation necessary to get the Enterprise to safety.
As if his capabilities were not foreshadowed enough in the realization that it was his own development of the formula necessary to transport a person aboard a ship travelling at warp wasn’t enough—-he demonstrates his aptitude (as always) when the Enterprise is in the most critical danger.
This—IMO—was every bit as it should be. I don’t see the problem. Is he funny? Yes. But he always was.
I don’t think it’s terribly unreasonable to go with the idea that Spock is in the past of an alternate universe (though I agree, the movie as seen is clearly ambiguous on the matter). And to be honest, if the writers came out and said the movie *does* wipe out the original timeline, I’d probably skip seeing the sequel. I doubt I’d be the only one, but probably I can’t imagine it’d make much of an impact on the profits. :)
#87—-”I don’t think it’s terribly unreasonable to go with the idea that Spock is in the past of an alternate universe…”
As a stand-alone story, I suppose not. However, it would be difficult to reconcile that with 52 other stories in Trek in which the effects of time travel are more of the classical science-fiction variety—that is, if a fan places significant value on continuity.
This is the ‘brilliance’ (if I may use that term loosely) of the decision on Bob Orci’s part to submit his view on the MWI of QM on the internet.
For those whose priority it is to preserve the notion that the “Prime Timeline” goes on within their imaginations, MWI/QM is there as a means to rationalize it (although that comes with embracing a pretty huge retcon).
For those who place a higher value upon canon/continuity, comfort may be taken in the fact that the film never actually challenges previous canonical entries with regard to time travel.
As an ardent canonista myself, I choose the latter.
“And to be honest, if the writers came out and said the movie *does* wipe out the original timeline, I’d probably skip seeing the sequel.”
I’ll never understand that line of thinking (although you are certainly not alone in it).
Since the stories in the Prime Timeline are already played out anyway (through 5 series and 10 other films)—I fail to see the reason for mourning its end (or especially protesting it). Moreover, it is not as if those stories didn’t take place within the fictional realm of the Star Trek Universe. On the contrary, the current timeline’s existence is completely dependant upon the events depicted in all 5 live action television series and 10 previous films forming the very timeline which bore both Nero and Spock Prime to begin with.
#46 DanPaine
This is a pretty cool place to live, except for the hurricanes.
#88 “I’ll never understand that line of thinking (although you are certainly not alone in it).”
Because that’s the storyline I’m both nvested and interested in. I have no desire to see it wiped out because some thinks they can “improve it.”
There’s no ire in that, just a personal preference. YMMV, of course.
#34 Yes, the Mirror Universe’s creation was established in Farragut’s “For Want of a Nail.”
@ 67. How’d you call my bluff ?
#90. What doesn’t make sense to me about your statement and perhaps what Closet is reacting to, is that if you are solely invested in the original timeline, why watch the alternate timeline stories at all whether the original timeline is still intact or otherwise?
In other words, if you are not interested in the new alternate characters and forthcoming stories, why watch them at all? Whether or not the old time line is wiped out going forward, that does not change the circumstances of watching the new adventures in the alternate timeline. The chances of ever going back to the original TOS timeline in either case is unlikely at best. Therefore, whether the original characters are wiped-out or not is moot. For the likely future, there will only be stories about the alternate crew.
As Closet pointed out, the events of the original timeline happened, whether they have been reset at this point or not (the DVDs of the “historical documents” exist to prove it). These are essentially the same characters in an alternate circumstance. If you are inclined to watch the new voyages of the alternate enterprise in the first place, what difference does it make if they are replacing the old timeline or not? These are the adventures Paramount is presenting as canon for the time being and can just as likely be reset in the future if some subsequent producer sees a practical reason for doing so. Why boycott Star Trek simply for some intangible principle that has no practical application in the real world?
I can certainly understand if the new Kirk or Spock start doing things that conflict 180 degrees with the original characters and stories … then there’s a reason to say, “this isn’t my Star Trek and I won’t take anymore”.
However, as far as stating that the old timeline is wiped out, it is unlikely Paramount will take any such position, vis-a-vis canon and it is even more unlikely that Orci will back off his MWI QM application of time travel either. So this conversation is moot as well. But the ideals behind it are definitely troubling.
For those who cannot accept the old timeline being wiped away for whatever reason, then MWI QM is going to keep you busy for a long time trying to reconcile the events of the old timeline which cannot directly exist under such a view of time-travel, including “The Guardian of Forever”.
TNG “Parallels” also violates MWI QM in that it is impossible to communicate between parallel universes, much less travel between them. So while TNG canonizes multiple universes, it does not adhere to the view used in ST09, nor does it involve time-travel or the branching of yet another universe, or violation of the existing changeable/linear time line view. In essence the original universe has its own laws of physics which permits time-travel and multiple universes based on no particular single theory or interpretation of the nature of the universe.
Therefore, if in your mind the original timeline must still be intact somewhere, you have major episodes that cannot be reconciled with the new film’s view of time-travel and quantum physics. Sadly, I can see no way for you to continue to watch the new Star Trek adventures without giving up some investment in the original stories and characters, without reconciling the monumental discrepancies between existing canon and Bob Orci’s explanation of time travel in this movie. Nevertheless, I do hope you do continue to support the Star Trek franchise, whether it subscribes to your specific ideals and principles behind the applied science involved in telling the new stories.
I saw the film again today with my partner. This makes three times for me and two for him. I haven’t seen a Trek movie more than twice since “First Contact”. I would like to see it a fourth time before it leaves the theatre. I haven’t enjoyed a Trek film this much in over a decade.
As much as I liked the subsequent series, I will always be a die-hard, first generation, original series fan ( I’m only three years older than the series, after all ). This movie gave me the chance to see my beloved characters young and fresh and ready to embark on all new adventures. Despite certain plot holes, and a resistance to the Enterprise redesign, I allowed myself to relax and enjoy the ride. I’m not troubling myself over what method of time travel goes against canon, whether this universe will unfold in exactly the same way as the original, or if Gary Mitchell will be mutated by the barrier at the edge of the galaxy. To me, this is a new universe…a new incarnation which has cleverly divested itself of years of baggage, leaving the new cast free to chart their own course.
The writers tried to pull an incredible hat trick of satisfying diehard Trekfans, and attracting new ones. They could have just ignored all previous canon and not bothered trying to explain how this new universe diverges from the original ( just as the new versions of Batman, Transformers, Battlestar Galactica, and previous incarnations of Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, and even Godzilla have chosen to do – with varying levels of success ). And that would have been perfectly fine… the original exists forever, and nothing will change that. But they did try, and I think they did an admirable job…not perfect, but then what is?
I, for one support this new Trek and look forward to many more. No, it’s not exactly the same, but this is a new century with new sensibilities.
And BTW… I hardly noticed the lens flares.