The new Star Trek movie has completed its fifth week at the box office with another fifth place showing. The film brought in $954K domestically and another $968K internationally to bring the five week global take to over $341M. See below for the full analysis of Star Trek’s five weeks at the box office.
Box Office Update: 5 week total $341.5M
On Thursday Star Trek stayed in fifth place in the domestic box office, and finished its fifth week with over $226M.
| Film | Wed 6/10 | Total (Dom) / days | |
| 1 | THE HANGOVER | $6,091,024 | $71,974,102 / 7 |
| 2 | UP | $5,125,891 | $156,663,709 / 14 |
| 3 | NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 2 | $1,822,051 | $133,846,805 / 21 |
| 4 | LAND OF THE LOST | $1,672,475 | $25,826,520 / 7 |
| 5 | STAR TREK | $954,517 | $226,428,402 / 35 |
| 6 | TERMINATOR SALVATION | $865,987 | $109,135,672 / 22 |
| 7 | DRAG ME TO HELL | $740,630 | $31,281,890 / 14 |
| 8 | ANGELS & DEMONS | $726,065 | $119,100,204 / 28 |
| 9 | MY LIFE IN RUINS | $349,229 | $4,661,283 / 7 |
| 10 | X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE | $219,506 | $175,216,933 / 42 |
Star Trek is now well ahead of recent franchise reboots, but still short of some other recent big blockbusters. Here is an update of the chart we have been showing each week.
Internationally Star Trek picked up another $968,424 to bring the total international sales to $115,154,765. The film opened on Wednesday in Indonesia, which gave the film a boost to be the first time int’l sales were greater than domestic sales. However, Star Trek’s international sales are still lagging other feature films. Although the film continues to be ranked #1 for 2009 in domestic sales, it is ranked ranked 8th in international sales by BOM (note: BOM data is a few days old).
Star Trek’s strongest market by far is the UK (which includes Ireland & Malta in sales reporting). It is also doing very well relative to other films in Australia and New Zealand, also English speaking countries. It is doing fairly well (not great, not poorly) in Germany. Its weak points are essentially everywhere else (the rest of Europe, Asia, Latin America, Middle East & Africa). Although Star Trek is doing better than past films in the franchise for those territories, it is still underperforming relative to other ‘tentpole’ Hollywood films. Here are Trek’s top 10 markets overseas.
| Country | Gross (as of 6/7) | Days | |
| 1 | UK | $ 31,095,889 | 30 |
| 2 | Germany | $ 11,849,235 | 31 |
| 3 | Australia | $ 11,542,175 | 31 |
| 4 | France | $ 6,881,162 | 32 |
| 5 | S.Korea | $ 5,687,110 | 31 |
| 6 | Russia | $ 4,107,618 | 31 |
| 7 | Japan | $ 3,974,603 | 9 |
| 8 | Spain | $ 3,872,013 | 30 |
| 9 | Italy | $ 3,127,646 | 30 |
| 10 | Brazil (by 5/31) | $ 1,730,458 | 23 |
Star Trek’s new global total is $341,583,167. It is ranked in 5th in global sales (again note BOM data is a few days old).
Week 6 predictions: New milestones ahead
BoxOffice.com is predicting that Star Trek will take in $5.6M in domestic sales, dropping to seventh place this weekend, as two new movies are coming out (The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 and Imagine That). The Box Office Mojo ‘Derby’ consensus is also for a 7th place finish, with $5.9M. [UPDATE: Steve Mason at Slashfilm is predicting Trek will take in $5.1M]
Star Trek opens in India today, so combined with the recent openings in Indonesia and Mexico, Star Trek could have a similar weekend overseas. Star Trek is approaching the $350M global sales mark, which it should pass this weekend.
Trek is also encroaching on the #1 inflation adjusted domestic sales mark for the franchise. When we last discussed that, we used the figure of $239,115,674 for the adjusted gross for TMP, which came from an analysis from BoxOffice.com. However using Box Office Mojo’s 1979 $82,258,456M gross, adjusted for 1979 ticket prices, gives the figure of $235,305,065. Here is a chart using the BOM figure.
As Star Trek is projected to near $232M by the end of this weekend, topping either of those figures doable by the end of June. Figuring out where Star Trek will end up is not an exact science, but the Star Trek film is falling into a pattern somewhat similar to the 2004 film, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, which topped out at $249.5 domestically (it also made over $540M internationally, or over four times what Star Trek will likely do). That film had a gross of $228.7M at the end of its fifth week, here is how its trajectory matches Star Trek’s.
So Star Trek finishing domestically in the $240-250M range seems likely, with probably another $125-$130M or so internationally, for a global total of around $370M, which is just about what Trek’s benchmark film Batman Begins did, with more coming from overseas.
Wow… I thought it would be good, but I didn’t expect THIS good!
Can’t wait for number 2 (12?)
Malta is part of the UK? Are you sure it’s not just part of the commonwealth?
Malta is a state nation in itself. It was declared independent from the United Kingdom of Great Britain in the sixties
i swear the nitpickers are going to be the death of me
Malta and Ireland box office is combined with UK box office, that is just the way it is listed.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/uk/
FFS
Very good news! Welcome back ‘Trek’!
No worries, Anthony. After all, Malta hasn’t gotten a fair shake since a guy named Paul had a few problems there with his boat and an annoyed snake…. :-)
Seriously, thanks for the analysis, well done!
dissapointed with international sales- why didnt paramount spend more on marketing & merchandise? the promotion was poor here in australia- i cant imagine how it was in the smaller markets?- the press conferences were not enuff- they knew trek had a history of poor international sales?
Sweeeeeeeet!!
I might go see it again here in Germany. Drove across the border to the Netherlands to see it there. I can see Belgium from my house, but 1 subtitle is better than 3. ;)
All in all this is VERY impressive. I just hope that it doesn’t mean that the often leisurely pace of TNG-era Trek is now dead. I loved the movie, but next time around a more meatier moral dilemma at the heart of the story would be much appreciated.
That’s great news! I still think ST09 will finish in this year’s top five. Pretty good for a movie about “that guy with the ears.” (course, it’s that and so much more).
I think it too soon to be thinking of providing sequel coverage…. yet (but I am sure Anthony has that under control).
Thinking of how the Batman franchise leap-frogged its beginnings with The Dark Knight, TREK fans have the same expectations for ST 2.2, although I don’t think the writers need the pressure of us fans hounding them every day for plot details.
I know I have high hopes for the sequel and expect it to transcend what some feel is a “popcorn” film (though I don’t exactly share that sentiment), but I do want to see more of the Roddenberry philosophy next time around.
But that will wait… be patient…
Heck, for now, I doubt Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof have barely had time to lay out a solid storyline, especially since they are probably busy gearing up for Transformers 2.
Needless to say, OKL are going to be busy in the months ahead!
Please won’t Transformers Hurry up and come out so it’ll Crush this thing and I won’t have to hear about it anymore.
I realize I’d Be rooting for Orci and Kurtzman again, but that is a franchise they can ruin and I won’t mind.
Frankly, I am sad that “Terminator – Salavation” isn’t doing better than it is, as I think it is a fine film… I liked it better than “Terminator – The Rise of the Machines.”
TS has some truly chilling, creepy moments and it presents some interesting concepts for the franchise’s future.
To paraphrase someone near and dear to our hearts, “I like this film, it’s exciting!”
Yay, Trek! I think this has been a great performance by the film so far.
# 11
Uh, you’ve made your point. No one is forcing you to “hear about it anymore”. This “thing” that should be “crushed”. You must be into S&M……just a guess.
Yeah, BTW, I can’t wait for the high-brow, character-driven, intelligent sci-fi of Transformers 2 !! It will be a mindless diversion, right up your alley!
Very cool.
#11:
I don’t get why you would bother reading about something (ST09) that you can’t stand nor like hearing about. It really makes no sense. If you don’t want to hear about it, then don’t read about it!
For example, I hated Nemesis, and I never read anything about it after I saw it. It really is only logical.
It must beat Transformers! To be beat by a 1980s Japanese excuse to sell robot-car toys would be an indignity.
#4: “i swear the nitpickers are going to be the death of me”
I’m pretty sure that this is the mantra of anyone who has ever spent any time working on any serious project related in any way to Star Trek.
I would be great if Star Trek can break $250 million mark but with Transformers and Harry Potter coming out soon. I am not sure if Star Trek can reach $250 million mark.
Also regarding inflation numbers. They are giving me bloody head-pains. Especially regarding TMP numbers. I haven seen numbers from other sites ranching from $235 to $240.9 million for domestic gross for TMP. It seems none can give definite numbers.
for now best way is to calculate is how many tickets TMP sold in 1979 According to Lee´s movies
TMP sold approx 33.303 million tickets but in Mojo approx: 32.7 72 million. It would interesting if Sta Trek can surpass these numbers.
South Korea surprises me . It is a tiny country with 48 million people compared to France that has 65 million and Russia that has 141 million.
I know Germany has a big Star Trek fan base but I didn’t think South Korea did. I wonder why their numbers are so strong especially since they aren’t an English speaking nation. For the next movie, Team JJ and crew have to promote it in Russia. 141 million people and only 4 mil???
I think someone should hold a Star Trek Convention there.
Matt D #3
Get a life!!!
Some of my friends feel Potter is great, but I never got into it.
I love the graph that shows ST:TM very close to Potter will really freak them out, and if it in the end bets Potter where can I get a Heart Shock machine, because I know I’ll have to restart some hearts or I’ll be visiting them when they are 6 foot under.
I’ve been saying for years Trek is almost 50 years old so lets see the Potter fanhood in 40 years and see how strong they are.
By then how many Potter fans will have reached the age of Star Trek’s age now, I’d guess around 33% will have reached 50 years. Star Trek fans will always be those of Wisdom, but but Lucus or Potter fans will have their loves because that is all they new so to them it becomes the best.
Just remember smaller inexperienced minds rarely make the best choices.
Trek minds will always rule!!!
These numbers get really interesting if you put them in relation to the population of the contries.
Here are the top ten and the US cents every inhabitant of that country spend on ST:
United States of America | 332,96
Australia | 52,93
United Kingdom, Ireland & Malta | 45,73
New Zealand & Fiji | 31,41
Iceland | 28,74
Singapore | 23,7
Norway | 17,71
Austria | 14,59
Germany | 14,44
South Korea | 11,76
Sadly that doesn’t consider low or high ticket prices, as these are very different between say the US and Nigeria (which is the last country in the list and where every inhabitant only spent 0,006 cent)
But it clearly shows the big gap between the US and the rest of the world.
I would also say that the marketing for the movie was quite good here in Australia. The numbers above confirm it.
I’d pay $50 to have it on Blue Ray TODAY!!! Oh well, looks like I’ll have to wait 5 more months. Waaaaaa!
I’m glad it’s doing well. It’s even leading UP! I’m not sure if the new Harry Potter will dethrone Trek, but I think Transformers 2 likely will top Trek for the year. Still, I’ll be happy if Trek makes the 2nd highest grossing film (domestically) for the year! I’ll keep pushing for it! I still need to see it for a 3rd time anyway!
A $245 domestic gross and a total take of around $370 is spectacular when you consider that the franchise had been on life support for such a prolonged period of time.
Now the question is can the sequel build on the momentum that this film has created much like “The Dark Knight” did after the success of “Batman Begins”?
My best guess is yes and no.
I don’t think “Star Trek” is going to make a big splash in international markets unless they get a major star to bring attention to the film. Unless a Tom Cruise type star is brought in to raise to the profile of the film I just don’t see ST gaining in the international market.
Star Trek has yet to really become a global phenomenon. While it’s numbers were more than respectable, I was hoping for a bit more when you consider the quality of the product and the fact that the movie wasn’t only targeted at the usual Star Trek demo.
Domestically Star Trek is back on the map… The powers that be finally did everything right. They brought in the new creative blood (writers, director,cast, etc..) that the series so desperately needed. And they finally treated the property with the respect it deserved… This was the first Star Trek movie that actually looked like a film rather than a tv episode in a long time.
Most importantly they gave the general audience back the characters they wanted to see. To the vast majority of the public Kirk and Spock are Star Trek. To be blunt, the general audience cares little about anything besides the TOS characters. They are the icons that made the series what it is. The return of Kirk and Spock made this film an event rather than just another ST film.
I think the next film has a great chance to at least hold the audience the current film has enjoyed (assuming it’s a quality film) and could add upon that audience. I don’t think “Dark Knight” box office is very realistic, but a sequel could top the $240 -$245 million this one brought in.
“Star Trek” did a great job of reestablisihng the franchise. I don’t think you could have asked for more this time out.
#22: “I’ve been saying for years Trek is almost 50 years old so lets see the Potter fanhood in 40 years and see how strong they are.”
Your comparison really is apples and oranges.
“Harry Potter” was published with the intent of a seven book run. It’s author JK Rowlings scribed the saga with a beginning and a definitive ending. “Star Trek” obviously has no limitations in that regards (thankfully).
This is not to say that Harry will not have some kind of cultural impact 50 years from now like TREK has had over the past 43 years.
“Just remember smaller inexperienced minds rarely make the best choices.”
Huh???? This means what exactly? I’d be careful about labeling anyone with the handle of a “small, inexperienced mind.”
1) some of your comments reads arrogantly condescending.
2) having been a teacher, I can certainly vouch for today’s inquistive young minds, most of whom can run rings around us in computer tactile skills.
And if you are referring to kids, I still wouldn’t make that assumption; using your comment as a basis, a lot of us had small inexperienced minds when we first starting watching/reading TREK. A lot of those same people went on to be doctors, scientists, writers, teachers, engineers… and even a President of the United States.
Sounds like we made some pretty good choices, and I would predict the same for our younger generation. Who knows? Maybe some of our young readers of Harry Potter will go on to do equally amazing things.
Just seen it again. i live in the UK but am in San Francisco this week and just caught it at the IMAX, bloody excellent! not only to see it again but to actually be in San Francisco and see the drilling rig fall into the bay just down the road.
i’m currently having a trekgasm!!!!
My hope is that Trek 2.0 continues to follows the Nolan-Batman pattern; first a successful reboot, proving the viability of the franchise (which has clearly been accomplished), and then a deeper, thoughtful, more involved sequel that takes all of that to the next level.
Star Trek – the concept – is more than capable of this. It’s up to Abrams and his team to realize it. They’re on the cusp of unprecedented “Trek” greatness so long as they don’t fall into the all-too-common trap of repeating themselves.
This Trek was a terrific “popcorn” movie, one that brought new life and new interest and a lot of good old-fashioned fun – it was the defibrillator that the franchise desperately needed – but the next one needs to grow beyond that, or interest will begin to wane again.
Witness “Quantum of Solace” – a solid enough movie that made plenty of money, but one that failed to truly build upon its predecessor and therefore saw 007 slide back down the hill a little bit again. Another like “Solace” would put the Bond franchise at risk once more.
Star Trek runs the same risk, but theirs is even larger – let’s face facts – it’s still not nearly as “mainstream”, especially internationally, as the numbers prove.
Abrams and Co. need to make Trek’s version of “The Dark Knight”, not “Quantum of Solace” – not as much for the money (both made plenty), but to continue building moviegoers’ faith. Going to the movie theatre is expensive these days, and audiences are being far more judicious with what they’ll spend their money on.
Quality – and forward movement – will be critical to long-term success. Anything less, and we’ll be right back to where we were post-“Nemesis” within five years… and it’ll take something even more remarkable to bring Trek back a third time, if it would even be possible at all.
I don’t envy the task before them, but heavy is the head that wears the (multi-million dollar) crown.
I’m a Brit with a Maltese wife and a large Irish in-law contingency so typically UK box office!
Still amazing how well TMP did adjusted, that film must have got something right despite the critics.
Regardless of population, you must also have sufficient number of MOVIE THEATERS which has a large affect on people being able to see the film!!
I live in Asia. Many, many theaters here have lower quality projection systems. And while higher end cinemas can easily be found, Asian’s often choose the lower quality cinema since the ticket price is 50% lower.
I got to see Star Trek 09 on a lower quality systems and the lens flares used by the director often turn the screen almost entirely white! It was terrible!
Some of my friends saw Star Trek 09 on these lower quality systems and I tell them “you haven’t really seen Star Trek yet.”
Maybe fewer lense flares in the next Star Trek movie will help Asian ticket sells.
Wonder what TF 2 will make?
TF 1 made $710m ww – $70m opening (star trek beat it!!)…$320 domestic…$380m overseas
now im gonna go against the general opinion here but i think it wont be as big….
maybe a $90-100m opening… HOWEVER – i think its gonna have a big drop off and will wind up with less than the original made overall as people have seen the whole transforming robots thing which people hadnt seen b4 with TF1 (like the way The Lost World made alot less than Jurassic Park as people werent so wowed by the dinos a 2nd time)…maybe the recession will impact too on those mega numbers
i know Megan Fox and Shia are bigger stars this time around (both were pretty much unknowns with the first one) but i still think it’ll make less
So maybe $300m domestic and $300 overseas = $600m ww
of course i could be very wrong and it does 800m (after all – although trek etc has been successful this year – there hasnt been a mega box office hit yet )
Anthony,
you’ve been comparing Star Trek with Batman Begins, but I followed that film very closely and I remember that Batman Begins didn’t get as big as promotional campaign as Star Trek has. So even if Star Trek reaches $370, which I think is a bit of a long shot, it still won’t have made as much as Batman Begins
Glad to see it doing well in the UK… I will be doing my bit, and seeing it for my 5th time next week.
It might beat TMP this year, but next year TMP will retake the lead :)
OOOOOOH Spain already exists for the international trekdom… Good for Spain… she’s a trekker nation as well, no paella no flamenco no more Spanish Inquisition… ST lives as well in Spain!!
Live long and prosper!!
Larga y próspera vida!!
Wow. Nothing like trying to clarify my own country’s borders to elicit abbreviated swearing from the site-runner. Literally the first time I have ever “nitpicked”, and it wasn’t to correct bad spelling, or Trek trivia. It was to confirm that Malta is not part of the UK.
What a terror I am.
#38-I think maybe this is just a language thing via internet print. I don’t think the way your post was worded gives the impression that you were clarifying. I think it made it sound like you were wanting to see a seperate statistic on Malta. But, I see what you were trying to point out and why.
On the other hand, I see Anthony’s point of view. Go to ANY other Star Trek site and see if it even comes close to the fantastic coverage this site gives. Bet you won’t find this kind of coverage and analysis anywhere else. Additionally, I thought Anthony’s statement about nitpickers was totally in jest…a joke about how nitpickers will be the death of many Star Trek movie writers, producers, directors, etc. But I could be wrong; only Anthiny can speak for Anthony.
Let”s all make up now and be happy. Frankly, should you want to clarify about Malta, perhaps you should send a message to the people that run boxofficemojo.com
For Star Trek to do so well against such strong summer competition is unheard of.
Witness the fate of ST:NEM that fought and lost to LOTR
and of course poor old ST:V that lost out to a whole plethora of big movies, most notably Batman.
This film has triumphed against very big summer movies. If I was a betting man then I would have bet on T4 and wolverine trouncing the Trek.
Quick, somebody cue up “Charts & Graphs” by Paul Shaffer to run in the background when this page is loaded!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1906939339033461190
If Paramount wants international box office for the next one, they can have it with a three word plot description: Doctor Who Crossover.
Box Office Mojo sadly only shows what a movie made in dollars. I guess that doesn’t matter for the domestic market. But internationally you can’t easily compare the popularity of Star Trek in different countries this way because they convert the different currencies into dollar. Star Trek could be quite popular in a country which won’t be obviously in any dollar list, if the currency there is weak. On the other hand Star Trek will look more popular in a country with a strong currency, even if there aren’t many viewers.
At the moment 1 US dollar is worth:
0,6079 £
0,7134 €
1,2286 Australian Dollar
1,927 Brazilian Real
30,988 Russian Ruble
98,415 Yen
1250,4 South Korean Won
That are the currencies of Star Trek’s top 10 markets overseas. Of course for a really good Star Trek popularity comparison you also have to know things like the population of the country, ticket prizes, numbers of cinemas which show the movie, how popular watching movies in cinemas is in itself in the different countries, and so on.
I guess we would know a little more about Star Trek’s popularity, if we have a list of numbers of viewers in relation to the total population of each country.
But for the film studios it is of course more important how much money a movie makes which makes some markets quite unimportant for them. I find that just a little sad for the fans living there. I already was disappointed about the advertisement in Germany but at least there was some (the Berlin premiere, a few commercials) and Star Trek was also shown in all big cinemas. In other countries there wasn’t any advertisement at all and Star Trek fans had to search for a cinema which showed the new movie. Hopefully this movie will be successful in DVD sales and TV ratings especially in those countries, so that fans living there won’t have to search for a cinema when the next Star Trek movie comes out.
Now let’s reboot Space 1999 :)
44. Captain Dunsel – June 13, 2009
Now let’s reboot Space 1999 :)
Agreed. While there at it they can reboot Buck Rogers in the 25th century and reboot Babylon 5
JimJ,
I love this site. Have been been a visitor for years. Will be a visitor for more years. Wasn’t trying to cause trouble, was just offering clarification.
I’m glad it’s doing well, but like others have said….. I wish it would hurry up and get out of the theaters so I can see it on blueray already!!!
#25, In terms of the other films in the franchise, looking at their relative popularity at the box office against its competition, an interesting trend emerges.
1979 TMP was #4
1992 TWOK was #6
1984 TSFS was #9
1986 TVH was #5
1987 – ST:TNG –
1989 TFF was #25
1991 TUC was #15
1994 GEN was #15
1996 FC was #17
1998 INS was #28
2001 – ST:ENT –
2002 NEM was #54
The first 4 TOS features were in the top 10 box office rankings. The rest have been in the top 25, until Insurrection and Nemesis.
Based on these rankings, it would seem that TNG indeed killed the franchise. It has been suggested that one reason TFF did poorly at the box office was the appearance of a poorly received TNG on TV the year before and its continued dissipation of the novelty of Trek at the boxoffice. But, there are many other problems with TFF as well. However, it still did a respectable #25 at the box office, presumably based on the success of its predecessor. This may have well hurt TUC which rebounded to #15 and likely would have performed better had it followed a stronger installment in the franchise. Interestingly, while GEN made more money than TUC, it ranked identically for its year. This was the ONLY TNG film to do as well as a TOS film in the year it was released, despite FC being the 6th highest grossing film overall. And, it wasn’t exclusively a TNG film since it starred Kirk and opened in the TOS era. Oddly as soon as TNG had to stand on its own, the overall popularity at the yearly box-office began to decline. Was this because TOS fans who did not embrace TNG stopped going to the movies (especially after the ignominious death of Kirk? Or, was it simply that TNG films faced stiffer competition for the year than TOS ever did? TOS definitely went up against some stiff competition for its day. Consider TWOK still earned 6th place in a year when ET topped the box office charts.
Another interesting observation is that there was an additional year gap between both TVH and TFF during which an unpopular Trek TV series was launched, followed by a weak feature at the box-office. If anything was going to turn a general audience away, that might do it. The exact same gap appears between INS and NEM, with yet another unpopular Trek series (ENT) debuting on TV in the interim. Coincidence? Or pattern? Was an additional year between films enough for a general audience to lose enthusiasm for the franchise? Like TUC after the weak TFF, so too did NEM follow INS and the numbers may have suffered from a double whammy, absence from box office and following a poorly received predecessor. Add to that the poorly received ENT TV series in the interim and a general lower lack of support for TNG from the broader Trek fanbase, not to mention a weak script and NEMESIS never stood a chance.
But overall, it would seem TNG never caught the interest of the entire fan base the way TOS did, nor was it as interesting to a newer general audience in the way that even the aging versions of the TOS actors did. Returning to TOS was clearly the right move in terms of galvanizing the whole fanbase and returning the most exciting and familiar characters to a general audience. If I had to guess, TNG will never return to the box-office, especially if CBS-D decides converting the entire TNG series to HD for syndication is cost prohibitive. Certainly, one thing that helps TOS is the fact it has been running in syndication constantly for 40 years and the ease of conversion and updating to HD, not to mention the popularity of the current film ensures it will be around for 40 more.
Almost forgot the most important observation:
1969 Star Trek (3rd season cancellation)
1979 TMP (reboot at boxoffice) – huge success
1989 TFF (worst of the 7 TOS-based films), TNG TV success
1999 INS poorly received, DS9 ends, VOY ratings drop
2009 Star Trek (reboot at boxoffice) – huge success
Trek seems to run in 10 year success/failure cycles, with box-office success coming every 20 years, following a reboot of key elements.
#48—-For me, the general explanation is much simpler than all of that.
The first 4 entries to the film series (TMP-TVH) were in the top ten versus their respective competition simply because they were better movies, IMO.
While I wouldn’t dismiss the notion that all of those other factors may have hurt those other 6 films to some degree at the BO, I don’t think that the absence of those factors would have resulted in any of those films making it into the top 10.
With that said, I do feel that the TNG films were handicapped from the beginning, in that the characters never had the crossover value of their TOS predecessors—upon which the first four original films were able to capitalize over an 8 year span (1979-1986). Obviously, TFF was a disaster, and the public taste for yet another one had been dimninished somewhat (not to mention the original cast was pretty long in the tooth by 1991’s TUC).
While the TNG characters have certainly since become sci-fi icons themselves, the TOS characters were/are “pop culture icons”, and there is a difference—-particularly in the potential for box-office receipts.
With the likes of mainstream figures such as Buzz Aldrin, Eddie Murphy, Tom Hanks, Ben stiller, President Obama, etc. referencing and indicating their interest in the Original Series to the public—-it is difficult not to acknowledge the disparity in crossover appeal between the original characters and those of the spinoffs (even the most successful of them). Aside from the most obvious factor (the individual film’s own merits), I think this is the most significant factor in looking at the BO results of the TOS movies (particularly the first 4) vs. those of the TNG-era.