ST09 Tidbits: Trek Hits $375M + Star Trek Lessons + more July 6, 2009
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Great Links, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
We are nine weeks in, but there are still Star Trek movie tidbits to round up for you. We have the just in final numbers for Star Trek’s ninth weekend, plus some are already reflecting on what Star Trek has taught us about the year (and the Summer isn’t even over yet). Also we have some new video from the May Hollywood premiere and more.
Box Office Update: Out of Top 10 – tops $375M worldwide
The final numbers are just in and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen had a rare 2nd Summer weekend win, coming in just ahead of Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (which opened last Wednesday). As expected, Star Trek dropped out of the top 10 in its 9th weekend at the domestic box office. With a combination of a big cut in theaters (down 675 to 1,148), and with across the chart low sales on Saturday (people spending July 4th watching fireworks instead of movies), Star Trek had its biggest weekend drop of over 50% to bring in just under $1.8M. Star Trek came up $162K short of the $250M mark domestically (but should pass that point sometime today).
| Film | Wknd gross | Total | Wk # | |
| 1 | Transformers 2 | $42,320,877 | $293,355,885 | 2 |
| 2 | Ice Age 3 | $41,690,382 | $66,732,868 | 1 |
| 3 | Public Enemies | $25,271,675 | $40,141,080 | 1 |
| 4 | The Proposal | $12,857,482 | $94,335,111 | 3 |
| 5 | The Hangover | $11,268,413 | $205,038,233 | 5 |
| 6 | Up | $6,521,389 | $264,816,694 | 6 |
| 7 | My Sister’s Keeper | $5,788,327 | $26,518,582 | 2 |
| 8 | The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 | $2,534,228 | $58,508,070 | 4 |
| 9 | Year One | $2,323,843 | $38,304,392 | 3 |
| 10 | Night at the Museum 2 | $2,043,288 | $167,706,959 | 7 |
| 11 | Star Trek | $1,769,967 | $249,838,139 | 9 |
| 12 | Away We Go | $1,096,212 | $6,077,303 | 5 |
Overseas Star Trek ended the weekend with an international total of $125,190,225. This brings the total global gross to $375,028,364. It appears that Star Trek’s time at the box office is finally winding down, but it will likely top $380M before it finally disappears from theaters.
Reflecting on Star Trek – what have we learned?
As Star Trek slowly steps off the stage of Summer movies, some are already reflecting on the film and what it teaches us relative to the other Summer movies.
In an article titled "5 lessons to have learned from 2009 already", io9 sees one lesson of how Star Trek-style optimism is back in vogue, noting
Terminator Salvation and Watchmen - two downbeat movies offering popcorn versions of pessimistic views of humanity (”Ultimately, man’s greed and laziness will lead us to become disconnected from our fellow man and controlled by the machines and mechanisms that we created to ease our daily existences – but doesn’t this slow-motion action sequence look hot?”) – both failed to meet expectation at the box office, while Star Trek’s hopeful, colorful version of a future that may be too lens-flarey to be cuddly but is nonetheless positive surpassed expectations.
In an article titled "Despite complexities, summer heroes still find time to save the world", LA Times film critic Betsy Sharkey contrasts Chris Pine’s Kirk with other summer movie heroes, noting:
Pine’s James T. Kirk, on the other hand, has to search for the good inside the bad boy, and he does it brilliantly, without question my favorite hero this summer. In Kirk, Pine embodies the kind of confidence-infused machismo that made Harrison Ford’s Han Solo so appealing in “Star Wars” years ago. Even before Pine’s Kirk beats the Kobayashi Maru test, you know behind those startlingly blue eyes is a strategic brain to be reckoned with, to say nothing of the sexual potency that vibrates around him.
It is always a risk to take on a deeply familiar character, particularly one like Capt. Kirk, whom William Shatner breathed a very specific life into beginning in the ’60s with the TV series. Even John Belushi’s “Saturday Night Live” satire of Kirk couldn’t have been so rich without the Shatner blueprint. Pine has to figure out how to create Kirk anew without alienating the cult of the old and is greatly helped by a fine-tuned script from Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman.
Finally, in an article titled "Hollywood’s New Math: Who Needs Stars?", Business Week contrasts how ’star vehicle’ films like Taking of Pelham 123 (w/ Denzel Washington) and Imagine That (w/ Eddie Murphy) have come up short compared to movies with lesser known stars like The Hangover, Star Trek and others. Here is an excerpt:
Big-name actors can still open a movie. But they’re no longer crucial. In bygone years, says Paul Dergarabedian, box office analyst for Hollywood.com, studios would have scrambled to find a big-name star to play Captain James T. Kirk and other crew members for this summer’s Star Trek. Instead, Paramount (VIA) selected a cast of relative nobodies, amped up the special effects, and “made it all about J.J. Abrams,” milking his following from his work co-creating the ABC TV show Lost. Moviegoers, say Dergarabedian, take their cues not from the stars but from the trailers they see on cable TV, the Internet, even their cell phones. “Today it’s the concept of the movie that motivates folks to go the movie theater, not the star who’s in it,” he says.
Star Trek celebrity arrivals
Our friends at ShatnerVision have put out a video showing the celebrity arrivals at the Hollywood Star Trek premiere on April 30th.
More ST09 and Star Trek Bits
- John Cho interview at UCLA Asia Arts Institute
- Screenwriter Michael Cassutt (Twilight Zone, Outer Limts) laments the use of time travel in Star Trek and Lost as being ‘too easy’ at SciFiWire.
- The Facebook Comic Con Group is holding a Star Trek movie costume contest
Loading ...
Comments»
Glad to see Trek finally getting the credit it deserves after all these years. :)
great stuff ! Hopefully they finally officially set a date for a blu-ray release soon !
Wow. Ice Age did pretty good. I forgot that was out. Harry Potter will probably do really well. What else is due out?
Good point about downer movies. Given the state of the union right now, people are looking for a distraction AND FUN at the movies.
I would imagine Harry Potter and Transformers will do well in the end, good points on what the attractice aspects of Star Trek were. Maybe that’s the “magic” element that’s kept Star Trek so successful for so many years.
It’s all been an amazing ride from the original news of a new STAR TREK movie all those years ago in “the Dark Ages after Enterprise and Nemisis. Then the arrival of TrekMovie.com and my daily visits to this site for the last 3 years or so, the “shocking” news that we had to wait another 5 months for the movies release and then the magic day 3 months ago.
I never thought we’d be collectively so happy with the movie that JJ, Roberto and Alex crafted, but here we are are…very happy and talking Oscars, sequels and a positive future.
Good work to all and especially to you Anthony for bringing us all together and helping to make it so!
I really cant wait for the next instalment.
Its like 2 years ago allllll over again!
$380 million is very satisfying. well done all. Good to see Trek back in the big time.
this site/boars has been a joy and i hope it continues now right through til the sequel arrives.
Greg
UK
Whoa Whoa Whoa….hold on, NOT collectively!!
Star Trek wasn’t that great, or good for that matter.
I don’t know who makes the decision to bump a movie out of a slot at the theater but it looks like they made a mistake…whoever it was. Look at the box office per screen numbers over the last couple of weeks at Box Ofiice Mojo. Star Trek did better business than Year One, Night at the Museum and Pelham 1-2-3. Had more theaters kept Star Trek, they’d have more money in the bank. (And I think they get a bigger % of the ticket sales as each week passes.) Bad call pulling it out before it’s time.
Since Star Trek did so well…I wonder if Paramount would be willing to release an extended Director’s Cut version into theaters before it rolls out to video? (Hint, hint!) Hey, why not? WB is doing it for a filmed that pretty much bombed with Watchmen.
A trilogy would be nice, and the 3rd installment at the end should reboot the reboot back to the prime universe,, then everyone’s happy and Marty can finally destroy the De Lorian.
I’m sorry I contributed to Transformers box office. That movie was an example of what’s wrong with movies today. Incoherent plot, juvenile “humor”, but hey I least it had awesome special effects. Jeesh! I wish I could have those 2 and a half hours of my life back.
..and get back to 1985
$380m just beats Batman Begins does it not?
heres to the $1b grossing sequel!
9- So why are you here?
Star Trek LIVES!!
Whenever the economy is in the dumps and prosperity is just a word in the dictionary, people like fun escapism. Who wants gloom and doom; we can read our 401k statements. A movie like Star Trek with good guys and bad guys and lots of warm fuzzies is what people want to see. It was quite the thrill ride and I can’t wait for the sequal: ST something something.
#8
Collectively meaning general consensus, The Last Maquis. You may not like it, but you’d be hard-pressed to argue that the majority agree with you.
14- Ithink you mean 8, not 9.
And as I see it, He’s allowed to be here & he’s entitled to his opinion.
I loved it! I’m sad that I only got to see it 3 times.
As long as you are civil, everyone is welcome here, regardless of your opinions.
”hopeful, colorful version of a future” !!!
BILLIONS OF VULCANS ARE DEAD ! !!!
The Horror !!!!
Transformers has got to be one of the strangest examples of movies today. All the critics panned it, many people say it sucks big time, yet here it is in two weeks making almost 300 million domestically. I don’t get it. I saw it the other day- it was ok if you like all action and no substance. If the movie is so wrong- why is it making so much? I can’t believe it has already passed Star Trek which was a much better film. Goes to show- many people today don’t know a good movie if it smacked them in the face. Or people are desperate for an escape. Maybe a bit of both.
we do hope you are indeed the last, Maquis… but you are certainly the least.
the answer about transformers is simple: it captivates the minds of 8-12 year olds. My kids have seen it 2x this weekend. The wife and I saw start trek three times, but without the kids in tow.
Translation: without kids,Start Trek did well. Transformers, with kids, did substantially better.
In any case, my wallet hurts.
I loved Transformers. One of the best summer movies. Why did you all go see it if it you hated the first? I LOVED the first one. So fun! It isn’t a crime to enjoy Transformers. I wish some movie fans wouldn’t be so snobby about it. I am avoiding Harry Crapper like the plague. I hate that series.
#13. screaming satellite wrote: “$380m just beats Batman Begins does it not?”
It does not. First it hasn’t hit $380 (with any luck it will cross that mark within two weeks). However, adjusted for inflation using Box Office Mojo’s numbers, Batman Begins grossed $417M.
Technically, it does, just passing Batman Begin’s unadjusted $373M.
Here’s how Trek looks with a steady (conservative) 30% decline every week from next week forward:
Week/WW Gross
10) $4.4M
11) $3.0M
12) $2.1M
13) $1.5M
14) $1.0M
15) $0.7M
16) $0.4M
17) $0.3M
18) $0.2M
19) $0.1M
Unfortunately, Trek is dropping faster than 30% at this point, therefore it may take longer to hit $380, and unlikely to top out past around $390.
Ultimately, it does not look as if it will pass TMP’s $398M (per BOM) in the franchise, which is disappointing because it does not appear the debate as to which has actually sold the most tickets will be settled – in the $390 range, there are arguments for both. I still have some lingering hope that ST09 will still pull out $400M through a surge in late international receipts.
Sometimes I wish these sites wouldn’t focus so much on box office. Can’t we talk about the movie?
Today’s time heralds a “new dawn” for emerging actors according to several supporting authors, which signals a great time to be an actor. A sure-fire formula for success seems to be a great story combined with actors who excel in their craft. This formula appears to be the difference between an “Epic” and a “Failure.” Still, visual effects and action seem to have carved a niche that seems to draw the masses into theaters. When we can be dazzled by “spectacle” and a movie allows for “suspension of disbelief,” this formula works even better.
It would be fascinating to look forward twenty or so years to see what taste in movies and audience might have. Or would it be that convergence of cable, film, and television be indistinguishable?
@ #9
Aye, I looked for Star Trek in my local theater about two weeks ago, but it had ran its course and had been replaced. I would have ended up seeing it 2 or maybe 3 more times after the initial buzz which could add up, especially since other movie-goers have mentioned this same fact.
There wasn’t enough time. The movie should have had a 3 or 4 week longer run in smaller markets, especially in IMAX in U.S. states with only ONE IMAX. The IMAX runs were too short in some states with only one or two IMAX theaters. In this situation, it would be beneficial to rotate releases which doubles the run of a popular film and also profits. But, scheduling is short and sweet in the IMAX arena, but they turned out in droves for it (Star Trek.)
It astounds me that Pine pulled off the seemingly impossible- filling Shatner’s shoes. And yes, that IS what he’s done.
It could have truly been a disaster- but it’s been far from it!
26:
Enterprise:
Several of us have been scouring the web looking for current business news related to Trek because we are interested in how the franchise will do relative to its peers. At first, it was just a hope that it would do enough biz to stay alive but it’s become much more.
Some of us have learned lots here about a film’s lifecycle internationally. A poor financial report from a certain country on this site usually results in someone from that country explaining just what went wrong.
Talking about Shatner and Khan ad infinitum is fine, but the business aspect is something I hope Anthony continues to write about because many of us follow it regularly.
Did anyone really expect the new Trek movie to bomb? It has a good cast, story, effects, etc, and it didn’t have the bad stigma from Insurrection, Nemeses, etc. It’s doing well. Better than all the other Trek films.
You bet $380M is very good. TMP world wide inflation gross is $407M. By the way, just watched TMP and TWOK on blu-ray and OMG I was blown
away. Even the menu system imprssed me, I love it. Regarding the new movie even now people I know who don’t like star trek and have not seen the movie are hearing good things about it and are considering seeing it. Two months in theatres and its still resonating which means that more people are going to see the next installment. Alex…Roberto…you have you work cut out, you MUST deliver ( I know you both will.) With JJ and all the talented back, this movie should be twice, three times more impressive.
MR. ORCI, CHECK THIS OUT!!!! Here’s a plot Star Trek writers, after losing 48 ships to a Romulan vessel from the future, the Klingon’s launch an attack against the Romulan Empire which spreads into uncharted parts of the Galaxy. The Romulans, who are getting the sh%t kicked out of them suddenly come across a floating Earth ship, SS Botany Bay. Make a long story short, Khan takes over the Romulan ship, makes a deal to help the Romulan Empire defeat the Klingons, thus destabilizing the balance of power in the galaxy, which causes Star Fleet with information from Spock prime to send in the Enterprise to kill Khan before he becomes even more powerful. Oscar if you would please.
31 Enterprise: Yeah, many people were afraid it would bomb. A friend of mine got a quote from Chris Pine over a year ago where Chris said he didn’t think that playing Kirk would turn into an ongoing role for future projects. He was that worried about the movie’s success! Fortunately, I think Chris has another paycheck or two coming.
Yes Vulcan was destroyed, but in the end our heroes won the day! Not by jumping back in time and making the earlier part of the movie never happen but by kicking the guy’s ass! It’s hopeful, but it also shows us that sometimes bad stuff happens, actions have consequences.I want to see where the next film goes, and clearly from the box office so do an lot of other people, Star Trek Lives!
Trek is only playing in 1 theatre in tacoma wa now-and only once a day at 1220-although it is in a few more theatres in outlying areas about 24 minutes away,so it is playing in a lot fewer theatres here but its not gone yet-i took a friend and her ten year old daughter sunday which was my lucky 7th time and they both loved it!-an employee noticed my trek experience shirt and asked me if i liked it i said yes for the 7th time–he said that movie still has legs and amc is going to keep it for a while longer-we will see-long live trek
Here in Mexico we can’t complain…. it used to be that you had to hunt down the trek movies if you wanted to watch them at the theater… they usually lasted 1 or at most 2 weeks in few theaters (this was before al the megaplexes and such).
Don’t even think about fast food tie-ins or toys at the store!!!
When comic stores started, you could at least get some of the novels and the rare magazine… at most you had to be satisfied with Starlog….
TV ? Only original series… for TNG, DS9 (only part of it), you had to have cable… I personally got a satellite dish to continue watching DS9, then VOY and ENT… I would tape the shows and watch it with some friends, who eventually became the local Star Trek Fan Club… TNG and DS9 eventually were irregularly broadcast on one network here…. at 3 AM!!!
We contacted the local Paramount distributor and helped to promote the last 2-3 pictures… but still it was considered a lost cause in Mexico (”Star Trek is not good business in Mexico”, they said)
2009 : We see billboards with the movie, commercials on TV, toys in the supermarket and tie-ins in Burger King. At last, it is a good time to be a trekkie in Mexico!!!
Transformers opened here on tuesday two weeks ago… That night I went with a friend to see the Star Trek Movie (my 4th time, his first). Even though transformers was on 4 screens and it was its opening night, the Star Trek Theatre was packed. Tuesday night showings (8:40 pm) are usually empty… so I think this was a very good sign!!!
Anyway…. we can bitch, nitpick or praise the movie… but I think it is safe to say that Trek is on a rebound and it great to be riding this wave!!!
My congratulations and thanks to all involved with this web site, and specially to the team behind the new movie (Mr Abrams, Mr Kurtzman, Mr Orci (didn’t know for the longest time you were from Mexico… hope someday we can chat), all the actors and people behind the scenes… you nailed it in regards of what Star Trek needed to live again… as fans we may not be all in 100% agreement, but the box office talks elloquently….
We sometimes forget that after all, this is show “Business”, if theres no business, we get no show…. :-)
OK.. I’ve talked enough…
#33 Eric, you at least deserve a star or more for a plot with out the Enterprise finds the Botany Bay. And it is at least plausible if not doable.
Even Rush Limbaugh back in the spring of 1997 spent a hole hour on the Greatness of Star Trek. He stated that the biggest plus point of Star Trek is that it gives the hope of a better future, unlike the hyping of the then VP Al Bore and his book The Inconvenient Book of Falsehoods.
I personally wrote him many letters expressing the need for a Trek Universe, and I most likely not the only one to do so.
So any guesses on how fast and many STM:TM DVD will sell and how fast, then how much these sales will add to the Gross total. My guess in 2011 as the next movie starts picking up pre-hype steam it will be $412-15 million. My heart almost typed billion, and that would be a nice dream, but that may need the real Starship Enterprise’s arrival. And if that happened our concept of the value of that green paper would vanish.
# 33 – Star Trek already had your idea…. It was called “Nemesis” and it was a miserable failure.
A genetically engineered human takes over the Romulan Empire… Sound familiar?
What a great ride that has been. Notched up 9 viewings myself and must thank everybody concerned for helping me get through a tough time in my life. What better way of escaping the world than hiding away in a dark cinema watching a great film? It worked for me!
I hope in sequel the producer will figure out a way to pump up the box office from foreign country.
Soon, Shatner will have an all-new excuse not to see the movie: ” I really wanted to see it but I couldn’t find a theatre which was showing it”! ; )
hey the star trek premiere in hollywood was in april at the chinese theatre,
Jake, you are right, and I should know since i was there. The premiere was on the last night of April (the 30th), but I filed my first report in May
http://trekmovie.com/2009/05/01/photos-video-from-hollywood-premiere/
I will amend the above article
Optimism is a big part of Trek, embodied in its bright lights (get non-flare bulbs!) and rich colours. It is also very true that Star Trek has great heroes, human heroes, that can show us what we are capable of. Klingons are a part of us, the Borg are too, and so are the Ferengi. Everything in ST speaks to parts of us that challenge, frighten or excite us. It encourages us to try to understand ourselves better. It gives us guidance along the way. With ST, we don’t have to be afraid because when we learn about ourselves through it, we will always find that humanity will be okay.
In the future, I look forward to Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof bringing the real world back into Star Trek and letting those great characters and all their insights show us ways we can make our own world better and brighter. Thank you all for keeping Trek alive.
Great to see that Star Trek will survive, as although I have many gripes with the new film I for the most part enjoyed the new Trek movie.
I only hope that the next bunch of movies are not going to be rehashes of classic episodes or I will be a very angry Trek fan.
When is it coming out on video?
#13
Will someone please explain to me the logic behind this all-too-frequently expressed notion that because THE DARK KNIGHT did gangbuster business as a follow-up to BATMAN BEGINS, the TREK sequel will do the same? Just not following where this is coming from.
#8
I’m forced to agree with you Maquis. Finally saw the movie two weeks ago and was vastly disappointed. I thought it extremely overrated. At a lost to explain the reasons behind all the good notices, and why so many chose to ignore the countless glaring weaknesses. All I can come up with is that the movie got judged on a curb–by critics and fans alike. I guess because the film was designed as a roller-coaster ride, like most of these kinds of “fun” films, people can always fall back on the “it’s just an entertainment” excuse, thereby legitimizing the film and and the experience when in fact these kinds of films usually aren’t very good at all.
Did anyone else notice the obvious imitation of Shatner’s Kirk that Pine did in the final scene?? It was great! The quick blurt of “Bones!” The way he sauntered over to the chair. The way he sat in it cross legged. I can’t wait for the next installment.
As for the Batman Begins/The Dark Knight references, I get the same vibe from Star Trek. The first one was a very good movie setting up the origins and back stories for the sequel, which will be better than the first.
Star Trek still doesn’t get the credit it deserves. People find this movie cool. But since both Abrams and all the guys here claim that the last 30 years of Trek were shit, people still find Star Trek as a whole lame und crap.
#48. the Quickening wrote: because THE DARK KNIGHT did gangbuster business as a follow-up to BATMAN BEGINS, the TREK sequel will do the same?
Two words:
Wishful thinking.
In case you hadn’t noticed, this site is populated by polarized opinions: Star Trek XI is either the greatest thing ever produced in Hollywood, or it’s the biggest insult to Gene Roddenberry’s legacy yet.
The reality is, ST09 is performing similarly to Batman Begins, though adjusted for inflation, it is not likely to perform as well. However, as even Anthony has pointed out, The Dark Knight is most likely an aberration in Hollywood, with many factors combined to explain its unprecedented success. There is nothing to suggest ST09’s sequel would perform any where close to it. However, many people stayed away from the box office because of the Trek name, and DVD rentals, PPV & cable will most likely attract new people to the next film.
But Paramount surely is not counting on making anything like TDK numbers. More likely they are hoping it does as well as ST09 since most sequels tend to fall off. But ST11 still could do better given how well its predecessor was received.
Historically ST09 has done no better than TMP at this point. Domestically, it is performing in the ballpark as the most successful films in the franchise: TVH & TWOK, despite coming on the heels of TMP which was a critical failure. With a much better lead-in than TMP, ST11 should be set up for an audience increase whereas TWOK had a large fall-off (but a much better profit margin).
Though ST11 has a much bigger challenge in creating a more compelling story to spread the good word of mouth the way TDK did. In many ways, ST09 had the most compelling elements over any other story they could write: not only was it clearly “not your father’s Star Trek” which raised the general audience’s curiosity to see how it was rebooted, but the media had seemingly set the bar so low they were ebullient in their reviews. Likewise, new and disillusioned viewers alike were prepared for business as usual and instead got the hottest new ride of the year. Further, the origin story helped bond new audiences with the characters they had never met before.
ST11 will have a much tougher row to hoe as it loses most of those introduction elements and must deliver a solid story that still manages to deliver the thrill ride of its predecessor, and without the familiarity aspect of the film, something Batman & TDK did not suffer from. All of those things combined would tend to mitigate the circumstances which would lead to a billion dollar Trek. More to the point, Paramount would have to invest heavily in international marketing in order to raise worldwide awareness about Trek to come close to driving the kinds of foreign numbers TDK had. Then again, if Orci/Kurtzman don’t burn out putting their best work in the View-Master movie, with an incredible story and amazing looking film, Trek has as a much a chance as TDK or TItanic of making history at the box office – which is a very small one.
#48—”Will someone please explain to me the logic behind this all-too-frequently expressed notion that because THE DARK KNIGHT did gangbuster business as a follow-up to BATMAN BEGINS, the TREK sequel will do the same?”
I think you’re either exaggerating the frequency of that opinion being expressed, you’re misinterpreting what is actually being said, or failing to identify a joke.
My own opinion is that the upcoming Star Trek sequel has the potential to do substantially better at the box office than ST09 did—but that’s about as far as the similarity to BB/TDK goes. The increased success of the followup to ‘Batman Begins’ was nothing short of remarkable. I do not recall ever seeing a “serious” opinion expressed which suggests that the Star Trek sequel will actually gross over a billion dollars worldwide. Perhaps I missed that, but calling it an opinion which is “all too frequently expressed” is a gross overstatement, in my opinion.
#53—”Historically ST09 has done no better than TMP at this point. ”
I think that’s at least debatable. Dividing the total grosses of the two films by the average ticket price for those years would seem to suggest that it has.
While ST09 has the added benefit of IMAX (and the increased ticket prices for those showings), I would submit that selling a $14.00 ticket is “better” than selling a $9.50 ticket—so that factor shouldn’t handicap ST09 in the comparison as some have suggested.
Better is better.
#8 “Whoa Whoa Whoa….hold on, NOT collectively!! Star Trek wasn’t that great, or good for that matter.”
Of course you are entitled to your opinion of the movie, but I just wanted to say that on opening night this was one GREAT movie experience. I don’t think I’ve ever been in a theatre so full of energy and excitement. Around here you don’t hear cheers and clapping at movies often, but that’s what we had. I didn’t hear any boos. I’m pretty sure that despite your opinion, the record stands that this movie is at least ‘good’ and is maybe even ‘great’ to the majority people who saw it.
I feel your pain though. I couldn’t stand those Lord of the Ring movies that everyone else loved so much. Of course, I didn’t find myself visiting and posting on LordOfTheRingsMovie.com either.
55. By your reasoning, “Up” has actually outperformed Transformers, because some of “Up”’s performances are 3-D, which costs an extra $2 per ticket.
If only it were so, but sadly, it’s not.
25. While I’m on record here as being unduly pessimistic, $400 million isn’t going to happen. There are no significant new terrotories for the movie to open in.
And while the movie has recovered it’s negative cost, it still won’t be profitable in theaters, even if it does hit $400 million.
#57—”By your reasoning, “Up” has actually outperformed Transformers, because some of “Up”’s performances are 3-D, which costs an extra $2 per ticket.”
“Up” has been out for five weeks. ROTF has been out for two weeks.
That’s light-years away from comparing the box office performance of ST09 (56 weeks) to TMP (the run of which ended 30 years ago).
So no…that’s not what I’m saying at all.
#55. Closettrekker wrote: #53—”Historically ST09 has done no better than TMP at this point. ” I think that’s at least debatable.
I said as much.
However, I also included more than ticket sales or gross revenue in that statement. In particular, ST09 is definitely going to finish no higher than 3rd at this point and most likely will not optimistically finish any higher than 4th, likely lower and definitely lower worldwide. TMP finished 4th at both the domestic and international box office in 1979. Whether you measure tickets sold or BO gross, overall ranking says a lot for a film’s performance.
There is also weekly declines at the Box Office, which unfortunately we lack the data to compare against ST09. However, TWOK & TVH with more data appear to have performed better in weekly declines while not necessarily earning as much.
Closettrekker wrote: Dividing the total grosses of the two films by the average ticket price for those years would seem to suggest that it has.
Well, diving ST09’s current gross of $375,028,364.00 by the average ticket price of $7.18 (which may or may not account for IMAX tickets) comes to 52,232,363 tickets and dividing TMP’s $139,000,000.00 gross by $2.51 results in 55,378,486 tickets. So I’m not sure where you get it has done better by that reckoning. TMP currently still beats ST09 by over 3,000 tickets.
Closettrekker wrote: I would submit that selling a $14.00 ticket is “better” than selling a $9.50 ticket…. Better is better.
And Hollywood agrees with you. That’s why they no longer report ticket sales, but grosses: which thanks to inflation, regardless if a movie actually sells fewer tickets than one even two years earlier will still gross more.
However, in terms of more money being better, ST09 has not earned as much BO profit as TMP after deducting the budget:
TMP $398M -$100M = $298M net
ST09 $375M -$150M = $225M net
So I still count TMP ahead of ST09 on three fronts: Total tickets sold, Total Box Office Gross, Total Return on Investment.
#57—-By the way, where does your math come from? UP’s total domestic gross is more than $28.5million *less* than Transformers at this point, despite being released 3 weeks earlier.
You’re not making sense at all.
#60—”Well, diving ST09’s current gross of $375,028,364.00 by the average ticket price of $7.18 (which may or may not account for IMAX tickets) comes to 52,232,363 tickets and dividing TMP’s $139,000,000.00 gross by $2.51 results in 55,378,486 tickets. So I’m not sure where you get it has done better by that reckoning. TMP currently still beats ST09 by over 3,000 tickets.”
Domestically (which is all we know), TMP sold approximately 32,772,293 tickets. That’s well over 3,000 *fewer* tickets than ST09 has sold to this point.
As for where that comes from, it comes from a June 20, 2009 article on this very site. As Anthony pointed out in that article, there is no way to determine either the average overseas ticket price or the various overseas rates of inflation (not to mention changing currencies over the last 30 years). There are simply too many variables to make a claim either way on the same point internationally.
Even the estimated total worldwide gross for TMP is suspect, since many of the currencies used to purchase those tickets abroad no longer even exist.
#60—”TMP finished 4th at both the domestic and international box office in 1979. Whether you measure tickets sold or BO gross, overall ranking says a lot for a film’s performance.”
But without qualifying that with the number of films actually released in 1979 vs 2009—-I don’t think it’s as significant as you’re making it out to be.
I think the most solid ground upon which to compare them is domestic gross.
TMP: $235,305,065 (adjusted)
ST09: (so far) $249,838,139
As for comparing their rate of decline week-to week, TMP was released in December, while ST09 was released in May. And again, how many films it has to compete with should also be considered.
Once again, I think we’re back to comparing domestic grosses and estimated actual tickets sold based upon those numbers divided by the average ticket prices of $2.51 for TMP and $7.18 for ST09.
ST09 is (hands down) the winner in both categories.
ST09’s domestic gross is over $14.5 million more than that of TMP’s inflation-adjusted domestic gross, with an estimated actual “number of tickets sold” advantage of about 3500 (and still counting).
#62. As a matter of fact, I get that ST09 has sold 34,796,398 tickets as of today. So that is exactly 2,024,105 MORE sold domestically.
I have no problem stating right now that ST09 has beaten TMP in domestic ticket sales and gross profits (well I still have some reservations given all the unknowns about TMP, but the more ST09 makes, the more those uncertainties are eliminated). The IMAX question still clouds the total tickets sold in the US, but the more Trek earns at this point, the less likely that matters.
However, with all due respect to Anthony, he’s providing HIS analysis of Box Office Mojo’s data. The very fact that BOM offers a worldwide adjustment for inflation of the average ticket price on the gross revenue of a film, suggests there is some reasonable margin for error accounting for all of those international sales figures – otherwise why offer it?
Since the foreign gross for TMP is $56,741,544, which we know from subtracting the domestic total from the worldwide gross (as reported by IMDB, BOM’s partner), dividing it by $2.51 gives us 22,606,193 tickets, compared to 17,435,964 tickets for ST09. So there’s your more than 3,000 tickets after deducting the $2K domestic.
Also, the foreign conversion to dollars was long since done in 1979. There is no reason to account for historical foreign exchange rates or obsolete currencies … we’re talking about actual US dollars earned in 1979. If anything, TMP adjusted for global currencies to the weakened US dollar would result in TMP doing even better worldwide.
So, again, I agree with your assessment that the performance to TMP is debatable. I also agree that at least the domestic gross has outperformed TMP. Given the IMAX question, I would definitely say that actual tickets sold is debatable, at least until ST09 earns as much as TMP worldwide (and it yet may). There will never be any way to definitively answer this question, which is why I continue to lament the fact that ST09 appears to be losing steam, so as to conclusively establish itself as the top film of the franchise.
Since I will obviously beat this horse across the finish line, we’ll see how ST09 ends the year.
#63. Closettrekker wrote: without qualifying that with the number of films actually released in 1979 vs 2009—-I don’t think it’s as significant as you’re making it out to be.
Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. ;-)
I did this analysis a while back. and I’ll post a link to the films TMP was competing against in 1979. The fact is, there were as many if not more films in 1979 when the cinema was more of a primary source of entertainment than it is today (not counting independent films which do not contribute significantly to box office rankings today either).
By the way, if you doubt me, you can always look it up yourself and refute me rather than just discount my reasoning out of hand. ;-)
While I appreciate your view that the US box office is all that matters, I wish you would appreciate the importance of the rest of the world too. ;-)
I am not sure what this obsession with TMP is all about, but it is pretty irrelevant to Paramount today. They are just happy that they have taken a weak brand and turned it into a strong brand that they can roll with for years to come.
But if you want to compare, then Star Trek will beat TMP in domestic box office, home sales, licensing and merchandising. THe only apparent place TMP outdit ST09 is Int’l sales, and I am not even sure I trust the published number for TMP. ST09 beats the UK sales easily and opened in more territories. But it really doesn’t matter, the overseas sales are a known weak point and has been for decades. But in the end I am certain Star Trek 2009 will make more money for Paramount than any previous Trek film.
The new Star Trek also beats TMP on reviews, buzz, and certainly on how the filmmakers are viewed at Paramount. But feel free to continue to obsess over TMP if you must.
#64—-”The very fact that BOM offers a worldwide adjustment for inflation of the average ticket price on the gross revenue of a film, suggests there is some reasonable margin for error accounting for all of those international sales figures…Since the foreign gross for TMP is $56,741,544, which we know from subtracting the domestic total from the worldwide gross (as reported by IMDB, BOM’s partner), dividing it by $2.51 gives us 22,606,193 tickets…”
The problem with that is you can then no longer use the $2.51 average ticket price, since doing so would assume that the 1979 international ticket price average is the same as the domestic average—which is all but impossible.
There are more than 200 countries worldwide (admittedly alot more than in 1979), and each one (at least each one where any of this is relevant) has its own average ticket price from year to year.
Using $2.51 is simply assuming way too much, IMO.
The only method of comparison which affords us anything resembling a constant is domestic grosses, which can be adjusted reasonably accurately for inflation. And of course, domestic grosses (even after accounting for inflation) fall in the favor of ST09.
While no one can claim anything more than “ST09 has outperformed TMP in domestic grosses” as solid fact—-it will never be known which sold the most tickets worldwide.
#65—”I did this analysis a while back. and I’ll post a link to the films TMP was competing against in 1979. The fact is, there were as many if not more films in 1979 when the cinema was more of a primary source of entertainment than it is today (not counting independent films which do not contribute significantly to box office rankings today either)….By the way, if you doubt me, you can always look it up yourself and refute me rather than just discount my reasoning out of hand. ;-)”
Really? Ok.
Now it should be noted that this does not differentiate between those in wide theater release (or released in theaters at all) and those that are not/were not—but:
There were (according to IMDB) 4,961 movies released in 1979.
Although only halfway through 2009, there are already 17,871 releases this year.
Now that is hardly “out of hand”. :)
#53
Thanks RD for at least attempting to understand my question.
#54
Thanks for missing the point of my question, the thrust of which was to explain the logic behind it. Not about to get into an opinionated discussion about what I find frequent and what you do. That’s just silly.
For those of you interested, certain IMAX theaters (2nd run) are now showing Star Trek. If anyone is in the Phoenix area, go see it at the Arizona Mills Mall Theater. Starts this Friday. YAY!!!
Domestically, ST09 has definitely beaten TMP for gross ticket sales and receipts. In fact the more it grosses domestically, the less likely the IMAX figures dilute the ticket sales. This cements ST09’s position as most popular film in the US above TMP in the franchise.
Where ST09 is also leading is in opening day, weekend, and first week Box Office, which says a lot about the popularity and marketing of a film. It also bodes well for upping that initial take with the sequel and beating ST09’s gross and popularity.
Also, ST09 has significantly better critical popularity and word of mouth. There is no question it is a better received film than TMP. That will also help the sequel. Given that, unless ST11 is a dud, it is highly unlikely it will follow the declining receipts path TWOK took, which was undoubtedly affected by TMP’s critical failure. Nevertheless, TWOK & TVH both finished 5th domestically and 6th worldwide, something ST09 is unlikely to do, leaving those records against its competition unrivaled.
As for box office ranking, whether the historical performance against the Trek franchise is of any consideration or not, ST09 is still underperforming those contemporary franchise reboot films to which it has been compared, i.e. Batman Begins and Superman, and will also likely finish behind their rankings for the year. However, it is performing similarly, and earning quite well against other films in this budget range. My point has always been, not that TMP is better, or that ST09 is not a good, or successful (or even better) film, but rather that It is doing no better than the best of the franchise was doing up until about 20 years ago, when a series of missteps and focus on TNG began eating away at the franchise both inside and out. Further unless Paramount is being run by a bunch of stupid spend-thrifts, the studio never expected to lose money on Trek from the beginning, and likely expected it to perform as well as TWOK, especially after their first screening, or they would not have likely spent $150M making it.
Star Trek is back after Nemesis for sure, bit not that much more successful than its historical potential. Whether Trek can do better in the future is anybody’s guess. If it’s a good sequel it should at least push the ground Trek has already tread. But the franchise’s true earning power is what remains to be seen. Can Trek compete with Star Wars if done properly, or is its very nature limiting to that kind of global success? I’d like to believe the former. Here’s to getting the sequel done right and finding out.
68. Closettrekker wrote: “There were (according to IMDB) 4,961 movies released in 1979. Although only halfway through 2009, there are already 17,871 releases this year.”
I assume you already realize the folly of that comparison … but I will elaborate for the casual reader: IMDB lists in those figures every short, video game, TV movie, direct to DVD release, student film, foreign, independent film, unreleased or other wise produced film a person can get listed with IMDB, mainly as a marketing tool. There are far more of these non-feature, or limited distribution products accountable in 2009 than in 1979. Also, the 1979 data is historical and much of it added many years later as priority allowed, while 2009 is active addition in real time.
If you look at Box Office Mojo for any year, you’ll find their list for Domestic totals only shows the top 150, for the primary reason that not many films affect the top box office results. If a film made $300M it is unlikely that a film that made $8M significantly affected its results. This has been consistent since 1979. There are an equal number of films in the top box office rankings as there are in 2009. Whether or not an indy film made $9M is no more relevant to the Transformers 2 gross than whether there were as many films released in 1979 to compete against TMP. In any given box office year, studios can only promote so many films. There are not any more significant number of studios than there were in 1979, the same number of big films continue to hit the box office. What has changed is the number of small independent films that have come to theatres over the years.
#5: Well-said! I “joined” the online fan community (as a lurker) in 2000, just as Enterprise was gearing up for production. I remember that vibrant shock of optimism we all felt when “Broken Bow” drew 12 million viewers… and I remember everything else we went through during those years.
The establishment of TrekMovie wasn’t just an important moment for Trek journalism–for me, it marked the change of an era, when Trek’s future changed from dark to bright. And these last three months… wow. What a ride.
#66 Anthony, far be it from me to doubt you, but I’m not sure that I agree with your assertion that ST09 beat TMP for ‘buzz’. I can well remember the excitement around the first Big Screen Trek and I have to say I don’t think this years has matched that. Its close, for sure, and of course very hard to measure- but i’d still give the Buzz Award to TMP!
Not that I’m obsessing!
I am giving TMP benefit of the doubt. According to Mojo the worldwide gross for TMP is approx: $398 million and S09 is $375 million. Please note the numbers for TMP is for 2008 inflation and not this year. TMP worldwide gross will pass $400 million mark next year.
Also TMP ended 4th in domestic and overseas market however i don’t see S09 any higher than 6th place domestically and it wont reach top ten list overseas. Overall no matter what we look at it TMP just has the edge over S09 at the box office.
#69—”Thanks for missing the point of my question, the thrust of which was to explain the logic behind it. Not about to get into an opinionated discussion about what I find frequent and what you do. That’s just silly.”
My intention was not to solicit debate. I simply pointed out that I believed your assertion that it was an “all-too-frequently expressed notion” was grossly overstated.
As for “missing the point”, I don’t believe I did. I thought I made perfectly clear that I didn’t believe that to be any more realistic than you do. Simply put—there *is* no logic behind that notion.
#8 – “Star Trek wasn’t that great, or good for that matter.”
Despite the grief that you get from other posters on this site for such an opinion, my best friend and I, who are both fans from its original NBC days, saw it together and are in full agreement with you. We both found it to be pretty mediocre. As my boss, who also saw it said: “All sizzle and no steak.”
You’re not alone in your opinion that it was not very good.
Well, I’m not surprised to see the vocal minority back spouting their “opinions.”
I think I’d rather just recover from the swine flu than read that tripe.
61. According to you (not me), higher average ticket price is an advantage. “Up”’s is higher than “Transformers,” so according to your logic, it’s doing better than “Transformers.”
Nice to see you accepting reality.
Hey, #8, #78 put opinions in quotes because we don’t have real ones, you see.
But then, he’s delirious from swine flu.
But majority opinion is always right. That’s why in pre-Copernican times the sun and the planets revolved around the Earth.
Oh, #78. I hear tripe is very good for swine flu. Enjoy!
#66
In 2005 Viacom split Paramount from CBS with CBS retaining Trek and all merchandising to same.
I have tried, and have failed to find any evidence that Les Moonves has allowed Paramount any recourse to participate in Trek merchandising/licensing.The only thing I uncovered was that Moonves gave Gail Berman a deadline to get the cameras rolling for Paramount’s ST XI or lose what rights to a Trek film Paramount retained.
I would be very grateful if you could show me evidence to support your claim.
#79—-”According to you (not me), higher average ticket price is an advantage. “Up”’s is higher than ‘Transformers,’ so according to your logic, it’s doing better than ‘Transformers.’ ”
What? That isn’t even close to what I said.
I think you are having difficulty with reading comprehension, or you just need to put the pipe down.
Up is not out-performing ROTF, despite having a higher ticket average. A higher priced ticket doesn’t automatically translate to a higher gross, unless of course ticket sales are one for one—which in the case of Up vs. ROTF—they are not.
A higher gross is a higher gross. The only thing suggested in that post (#55) was that a higher average ticket price doesn’t make the higher domestic gross for ST09 (compared to TMP) any less significant.
But I don’t know why I even bother with someone who still refuses to accept the difference between Johnny and Georgie….Lol!
I don’t get it either. TMP was/is an utter BORE that I cannot stand to watch, the only worthwhile scene was Enterprise drydock. The characterizations where dull/out of character. The pacing was like watching paint dry in a funeral home, ugh. I can’t imagine why anyone thought this was ‘good’ in 1979, let alone today.
This is 2009, Trek is back. If you dont like it pop in your VHS of TOS and stay in your basements..