Announcement

**Mikey** · May 17, '09, 8:51 PM

So if this Star Trek movie reaches $250...it will be the highest domestic grossing Star Trek film of all times...adjusted for inflation or not.

If any of that money was going to me, I might care

**toys2cool** · May 17, '09, 9:19 PM

I knew this film would do well.

By the way i saw Angels & Demons and I wish i would've watched Star Trek instead

**Hector** · May 17, '09, 9:22 PM

Originally posted by type1kirk

So if this Star Trek movie reaches $250...it will be the highest domestic grossing Star Trek film of all times...adjusted for inflation or not.

If any of that money was going to me, I might care

Mike...you don't care about anything in this universe.

**Hector** · May 17, '09, 9:23 PM

Originally posted by toys2cool

I knew this film would do well.

By the way i saw Angels & Demons and I wish i would've watched Star Trek instead

I hated the first one...so I won't be watching this one.

**trekman101** · May 17, '09, 9:39 PM

This is going to be a bench mark movie for trek...lets hope the next one will follow and surpass.....
Star trek is back........

**toys2cool** · May 17, '09, 9:49 PM

Originally posted by Hector

I hated the first one...so I won't be watching this one.

naw I loved the first one,this one was good don't get me wrong. It just didn't have anything crazy like the first one. Like even though you know the first is BS,part of you wants to believe something like that could be possible

**jessica** · May 17, '09, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by toys2cool

naw I loved the first one,this one was good don't get me wrong. It just didn't have anything crazy like the first one. Like even though you know the first is BS,part of you wants to believe something like that could be possible

The book is definitely a fun read. I hate Tom Hanks.

**Seeker** · May 17, '09, 11:04 PM

Hmm why do I see an old luke going back into time to recreate a new timeline because an old Imperial villian out for revenge goes back into time and.........

**Captain** · May 18, '09, 2:36 AM

Actually, overseas Trek isnt doing that well. Trek web has an article up about this today. Besides English speaking countries and Germany, the movie is apparently "getting by", but not doing stupendously. Canada and the US are obviously different stories.

Another note. I read an article the other day that showed the differences in take between all the Trek films. The article also only dealt with opening weekend takes. When adjusted for inflation, plus the neat little trick of opening on a Thursday vs a Friday, giving an extra day, plus adjusting for the number of screens played on, The new film comes in behind the opening takes on TMP and TWOK. Of course this is conjectural, but the author took an average per theater daily take, and then applied this to the extra number of screens the current film has. For example, the new movie opened on 3600+ screens. The first movie only opened on 897.

Not trashing the new films tally at all. In fact, I'm glad to see Trek leading the box office for the first time in years. Just thought the article was interesting and this seemed to be a good spot to bring it up. Makes a guy wonder, what would a seventies uber-blockbuster like Star Wars have done in todays money when all of these features (including the vastly greater number of available screens today) are taken into account?

**ctc** · May 18, '09, 10:21 AM

>I knew this film would do well.

Most films do these days; I suspect 'cos the studios got the distribution thing figured out....

>the new movie opened on 3600+ screens. The first movie only opened on 897.

Yeah, stuff like that.

>overseas Trek isnt doing that well.

Hmmmm.... maybe 'cos a lot of other countried have their own equivalent? I could see an Ultraman movie doing better than Trek in Asia, and most of Europe has their equivalent in local space hero Perry Rhodan. (Even though there's only been one movie....)

>Makes a guy wonder, what would a seventies uber-blockbuster like Star Wars have done in todays money

There's that; and there's the impact it makes on the audience. Films are really short lived these days. For the next couple of weeks it's gonna be nothing but Trek; then the NEXT blockbuster comes out and it'll be nothing but THAT. Even for the audience, newer films don't make much of an impact. They're forgotten as soon as the NEXT shiniest thing comes along. (The original Star Wars lucked out 'cos it came out at a time when nobody had done an epic space opera for a while. And Lucas wanting space to look "lived in" made it different from it's predecessors. Not a lot, but just enough to stand out.)

I suspect it's due in part to the massive amounts of competition out there. But I think part of it also comes from studios playing it safe and making exactly the kind of movies they think the audience wants. So most films don't have anything that makes them different from any other film in their genre. The effects may be better, the stars may be bigger, but the film itself is the same as countless others. 'Course, this isn't NEW; but it IS prevalent.

I was thinking about this while watching "How William Shatner Changed the World" the other day. At the end they mention how the guy with the goatee (who's name escapes me) came in, and wanted to make everything NOT clean and safe.... and how every series after that tanked. Made me think: the underlying theme of Trek was that humanity would eventually get it's stuff together.... that there was hope for the future, that things could be better than they are now. THAT'S what made it unique, not Klingons or phasers. Take that away and you get.... well, durned near every other spaceship show ever. No matter how well done the action is, it's not gonna make a lasting impression on the viewers.

So I think the new Trek film will do incredibly well, sell a lot of DVDs in September, and be forgotten by next year like every other film.

Don C.

**Seeker** · May 18, '09, 10:26 AM

I think including a Neptunian in the next sequel will bring in even more box office money.

**Gorn Captain** · May 18, '09, 10:47 AM

The new movie is doing terribly here.
From the second week already, it went to one of the smallest theatres.
That means it might be gone come wednesday.

I went in week 2, and there were just 30 people on a saturday!
Hardly any kids.

ST is dead here....

**Adam West** · May 18, '09, 12:04 PM

I still haven't had a chance to see it yet due to my kids sports commitments but hopefully this weekend since it is longer.

Personally, I don't think you really get an apples to apples comparison to try to compare Star Trek to Star Wars 1977 adjusted for inflation, screens, etc.

One of the biggest problems is that if you did not see it in a theater back then; you were out of luck because there was no home movie release. Now movies follow a lifecycle pattern from movie to dvd (there is so much profit in DVD's that many times studios are just looking to break even on the theatrical release and make most of the profit off of the DVD). I only go to see a handful of movies per year in the theaters because I'm willing to wait for the DVD. If there were no DVD; you can bet I'd be at the theaters more often.

**BlackKnight** · May 18, '09, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Hector

I hated the first one...so I won't be watching this one.

I didn't hate the 1st one...
But it was most definately one of those movies that you don't really need to see,.. & you are kinda like "meh" once its over...

I feel the same way about the 2 National Treasurey Flicks.

Announcement

Star Trek's box office numbers

Star Trek's box office numbers

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment