Star Trek into Darkness Box Office Prediction Thread

Do you still remember that there were no movies after Nemesis, and no new series after Enterprise, until the success of ST09? I think the fan base had burnt out on Star Trek, and if not for Abrams the franchise would've stagnated. You guys should've given him more credit.

I remember. They couldn't break out of the formula that ran the movies into the ground, and the movies haven't changed. They're still trying to make another Wrath of Khan.

Are you speaking for all of them now? Did I miss a meeting?

All of the Star Trek fans I know loved the movie. I know there are fans who don't like it, but don't presume that its a majority.

Nope. Just a "good chunk" as I stated before. The divide seems consistent. If you liked the last three seasons of DS9, you probably like Abrams. If you thought the last three seasons of DS9 had Roddenberry rolling over in his urn, then you probably don't like the new Trek.

My primary problem is the poor writing. I was open to the idea of the reboot. I want Trek to have new life as much as any fan. I like JJ's style, I love the cast, but they've got some of the worst writers in Hollywood writing it, and it just isn't working for a lot of us.
 
Last edited:
I just think people aren't clamoring for it. It is going to be a solid hit. The international box office will go up. It will make good money. But Star Trek just isn't that big a deal and this is a crowded year. The first film being great didn't change that. It just meant the first film was great.
 
If this was released last year at the same time, do we honestly think it would have fared better with the Avengers? I see it performing about the same. Hell, perhaps smaller since Avengers dominated. IM3 is huge but not Avengers huge. In a perfect world, 2011 would have been the time. But that wasn't possible.

It's not solely the four year gap. It's the wait combined with that with something like ST, despite the last film's success and recognition, is still ST, and is something that could very well lose credibility with the GA faster than other franchises if it isn't a constant, meaning perhaps, every two years. But I won't pretend to know that, since the film wasn't released in 2011.

But 83 mil ain't bad. It's not 103 mil or anything but it's better than 63 mil. I don't know, being in line for the IMAX 3D showing for the 10:15 pm show, seeing everyone in line, Star Trek fan and average joe, it was just really cool to be among them. We were all there to see Star Trek and at the same time, just see a great film. The fact that Abrams reached the average person to be willing to wait in line for an hour and a half to see a Star Trek film was just really cool. I'm not even a Trekkie and I was still touched by that.
 
This movie was slated for June 29, 2012 I believe before it was moved, didn't have to compete with Avengers. Only major competition would've been ASM, which it certainly could've taken on.
 
When was it meant to be released then? I thought it was May 2012.
 
That was GI JOE 2 actually.

Yea after they moved Trek out of that spot. Paramount needed another movie so they moved GI JOE 2 from August. But eventually both ended up in 2013.
 
Seems to work well for Nolan. But JJ's approach just seems ridiculous. Especially when it came to Super 8.
Not sure if [BLACKOUT]Khan[/BLACKOUT] is as big as a draw as say, Joker. But at least he's got name recognition. [BLACKOUT]John Harrison? [/BLACKOUT]Sure, that's such a villainous name. :funny:

The reveal in TDKR didn't make the marketing moot. Bane was still the cinematic baddie who did all the popcorn-worthy stuff. Even IM3 played with it a little bit - even if it pissed people off, at least the twist MEANT something, you know?

In STID, the secrecy seems to be just for the sake of having a twist. :huh:
 
The underperforming box office is certainly surprising. A huge number of my friends have already gone to see it. But then again I hang out with a bunch of uber-geeks. :oldrazz:
 
From what I've been reading, STID only made a 6% improvement on the first film's performance domestically, which is way under what Paramount was expecting... but it made an 80% improvement over its international performance.
 
I was hoping for at least a $90 million opening, but it is what it is. It'll probably drop down to third next weekend dealing with The Hangover III and Fast and Furious 6, but hopefully it'll remain in the top 5 until June.
 
From what I've been reading, STID only made a 6% improvement on the first film's performance domestically, which is way under what Paramount was expecting... but it made an 80% improvement over its international performance.

It actually performed worse than the first film domestically. And its only made 31M internationally. I'm not sure where it has and hasn't opened yet, but I don't see it doing much better than the 131M internationally that the first film did.
 
it is the fault of the mistery box and and its not at the same time. IMO bla bla bla.

its of course the fault of the mistery box type promotion. JJ's mistery box is not about NOT spoiling the movie . its about creating a fake mistery to get people interesting . it never worked IMO.

and there is a big difference between Nolan and JJ. Nolan is just trying to make the movie and keep his plot and third act spoilers until the movie opens. JJ is running around saying '' i have a secret but i can not tell you''.

and enough with the JJ defending. of course bad marketing is JJ's fault. he had a lot control over it. enough is enough.

SITD is an entertaining movie and bad ST movie IMO.
 
I saw it late Saturday afternoon in 3D IMAX Experience...and the theater was mostly empty.
 
I also can't help but think that it opening a couple of weeks after two hits Iron Man 3 and Great Gatsby probably didn't help. I've forgotten but did Star Trek 2009 have any stiff competition on its opening weekend?
 
I don't know but i think Star Trek 2009 had better marketing.
 
I don't know but i think Star Trek 2009 had better marketing.
It had a better approach - keep it about Kirk and the crew. Nero was almost an afterthought.

For STID, they decided to focus on the villain, which was executed well but perhaps was not the best approach. Benedict is a tremendous actor and you could sense that he had control over the whole thing (and DAT VOICE)....but there wasn't really anything physically threatening about him in the trailers. So he blew up a meeting and runs and beats up people and it was implied that he attacked London, but compare it to the Joker rampaging on the streets of Gotham and there's no contest.

If you're going to go with a big bad terrorist approach, you have to market him as actually provoking terror. Not just some mysterious guy that they're trying to get revenge on.
 
So it opened lower than film one? Wow. Looks like Star Trek can never catch a break. It actually saddens me. :(
 
It was weird that the trailers almost made it look like the Enterprise was crashing into San Francisco when it was in fact the Vengeance.
 
It was weird that the trailers almost made it look like the Enterprise was crashing into San Francisco when it was in fact the Vengeance.

I think that was the point.
 
I was disappointed with this film mainly due to the big reveal. But I think it's too early for doom and gloom. It's underperforming but it made a lot of money this weekend and when you add in the international box office I think it's ultimately going to be fine. Not to mention the DVD/Blu-Ray sales.

But I do have to admit, now looking back in hindsight, if what some of you guys are saying about the marketing is correct.

I wasn't too pleased with the marketing. It felt like a rehash of Trek 2009, a superpowered (compared to most of the crew anyway) madman wants revenge against the Federation and he has a bigger, superpowered ship.

I guess being coy about Harrison didn't work. I mean the hardcore Trek fans were going to see the film anyway and the casual fans probably didn't care. Perhaps if they had just been straight up about it it would've garnered more interest from fans and the media which could've translated to more interest from casual fans.

I also think the long wait between movies hurt. And (for whatever reason) Paramount/CBS didn't capitalize enough on the success of the first film. They should've gone Lucasfilm style on us with all kinds of projects and products to buy in the interim and for the new film. I didn't even see any toys this time around for Into Darkness. For Trek 2009 you had some neat stuff. I think in part the secrecy regarding Harrison and the Klingons might have played a role in a reluctance to spoil those reveals by releasing toys and other merchandise.

All that being said, despite my misgivings, the film does have re-watch value and it might have legs. Though it's going to be tough facing off against Hangover and Fast and Furious next week.
 
Heads are going to roll tomorrow.

But who falls on the sword? Not Abrams, he jumped ship months ago. Most likely those writers. I expect Paramount to clean house and replace them for Star Trek 3.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"