Star Trek into Darkness Box Office Prediction Thread

[Octoberist]

It'll make their money back but with the next movie, without JJ's direct pull, I can see a budget decrease.

Like whar I said before, Star Trek is both iconic and vulnerable. You got the attention of the public back in 2009, making Trek more accessabke than ever, then they should've exploited it while it lasts. Because once 'Wars' drops by, I can see the public saying 'bye toots' to Kirk as they jump into the convertible with Luke and Han.

 

[Mr. Dent]

Everyone is calling this a flop but it's pretty much on track for what I figured it would do, $500m. Don't know what was up with people predicting $700m and $800m.

 

[Octoberist]

It would be if it was of the same quality as the first.

While I enjoyed 'Darkness', it wasn't as good as the first. If the first was an A, I would give this one a solid B.

 

[Octoberist]

Everyone is calling this a flop but it's pretty much on track for what I figured it would do, $500m. Don't know what was up with people predicting $700m and $800m.

Flop is a strong word to use for sure. A solid but 'dissapointing' intake is more fitting perhaps. Even then, you gotta think about the legs.

 

[jmc]

This is why I no longer play the box office game. Coz every time I think a film is going to do big numbers it inevitably doesn't and vice verse. I learned my lesson with the hunger games.

 

[Marvin]

As "disappointing" as this film may have been to some, I honestly found it more enjoyable than all the marvel films sans Avengers. Especially on the badass villain front.

I also love that Pine is playing a better hal jordan in these than the other guy.

 

[Tony Stark]

It's not a flop, but having a reduced audience on opening weekend for a sequel is more than disappointing. Especially when the reviews are so good. This reminds me so much of when Prince Caspian came out. I think it was even the same weekend in May. The mid-May release has been a death trap for so many opening films.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

This movie will make decent money at the box office but the reason is performing less than expected is because this is an unusually crowded month. I don't remember a May being this full of summer blockbusters and the summer season hasn't really kicked off. Iron man 3, Great Gasby, This movie, then Fast 6 and Hangover part 3 this coming weekend. This movie has stiff competition so hopefully it does well this weekend because it might fall off next weekend with Fast 6 and Hangover 3. Shame because its a fantastic movie.

 

[Blade X]

Flop is a strong word to use for sure. A solid but 'dissapointing' intake is more fitting perhaps. Even then, you gotta think about the legs.

I prefer to use the word "underperformed".

 

[TheVileOne]

The movie isn't a flop but it is underperforming.

They waited too long. There was a ton of momentum after Trek 2009 that they WASTED.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

Lot of factors for underpeforming.

1. Loss of momentum, hopefully it will be re-gained with the release of TREK 3 in '16.

2. Much, MUCH weaker marketing than TREK '09. TREK '09 trailers were exhilarating and bold, Into Darkness' were far more bland and boring in comparison.

3. The idea of not revealing [blackout]Khan[/blackout], Trek's greatest villain in the advertising. Too bad Paramount/Abrams had to resort to the inane Mystery Box conceit again in marketing.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Lot of factors for underpeforming.

1. Loss of momentum, hopefully it will be re-gained with the release of TREK 3 in '16.

2. Much, MUCH weaker marketing than TREK '09. TREK '09 trailers were exhilarating and bold, Into Darkness' were far more bland and boring in comparison.

3. The idea of not revealing [blackout]Khan[/blackout], Trek's greatest villain in the advertising. Too bad Paramount/Abrams had to resort to the inane Mystery Box conceit again in marketing.

2017 at the earliest.

I do love the black out in point 3, only for you to go on and describe who it is in the next few words.

 

[TheVileOne]

Trying to make Trek into LOST was ****ing stupid.

Trek isn't LOST JJ Abrams. It didn't work.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

We'll get Star Trek 3 for 2016, for no other reason than celebrating the 50th anniversary. Same as Bond last year.

 

[jmc]

I must say the marketing for this film wasn't the best. I think I read somewhere that the issues with CBS and Paramount might be the reason for it. Could be wrong so don't quote me on that.

 

[TheVileOne]

That was a weird story.

Clearly Abrams had a great amount of control in how this movie was rolled out. He was extremely secretive. They had the whole 1701 thing. The apps. Orci and Kurtzman worked on a video game that came out last month with the entire movie cast involved.

I think where they messed up was all the LOST mystery stuff they tried to do for this movie which IMHO doesn't work for Star Trek.

Apparently CBS was still releasing classic series merchandise etc, but I mean . . . so what? Did people not know a new live action movie was coming? It's not CBS' job to market this movie.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

2017 at the earliest.

I do love the black out in point 3, only for you to go on and describe who it is in the next few words.

Eh. I don't think I'm being too specific & I'm also being subjective when I see "greatest villain".

Also, it's now 2AM, full coherency is hard to keep track of, lol.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

That whole CBS and Paramount dispute doesn't excuse the lackluster trailers.

It's dumbfounding that the best Paramount could come up with for Harrison to say in the trailers was "you are not safe".

 

[TheVileOne]

The mystery of Harrison IMHO completely backfired and was a failure.

And I love Cumberbatch, but the whole mystery was poorly done.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The mystery of Harrison IMHO completely backfired and was a failure.

And I love Cumberbatch, but the whole mystery was poorly done.

I agree on the promotion front. Bad move imo.

 

[BestGirl]

If there's one good thing to come out of this, maybe studios will stop with the mysterious Nolan/Abram approach to marketing. I'm getting tired of movies being treated as though they were matters of national security.

 

[TheVileOne]

Once again, this is Star Trek, not lost. It's one thing to try and make Star Trek like Star Wars, but do NOT make it like STAR TREK LOST!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If there's one good thing to come out of this, maybe studios will stop with the mysterious Nolan/Abram approach to marketing. I'm getting tired of movies being treated as though they were matters of national security.

Seems to work well for Nolan. But JJ's approach just seems ridiculous. Especially when it came to Super 8.

 

[jmc]

If there's one good thing to come out of this, maybe studios will stop with the mysterious Nolan/Abram approach to marketing. I'm getting tired of movies being treated as though they were matters of national security.

You'll have to explain that one.

 

[TheVileOne]

If there's one good thing to come out of this, maybe studios will stop with the mysterious Nolan/Abram approach to marketing. I'm getting tired of movies being treated as though they were matters of national security.

I definitely agree.

Remember how LucasFilm did the exact opposite for Revenge of the Sith and it paid DIVIDENDS for that film?

Listen, I get you want us to be surprised, but don't treat this plot like its LOST. Cause it ain't.