Comments on: Box Office: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Opens At Number #1 But Falls Below Expectations

By: oogle monster

oogle monster — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:16 +0000

Stoked to see Gatsby doing so well!! This film should easily make its budget back and then some.

By: Maxine

Maxine — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:16 +0000

Judging by Paramount's domestic marketing, including domestic trailers, TV spots and the domestic poster, it's fair to say that they didn't sell this film as a Villain/ Cumberbatch movie at all in the US, which is quite right considering how underwritten and underutilized the villain and Cumberbatch is in this movie; the movie's international marketing is a huge misleading, but at least in the UK, where Cumberbatch is a well known star, the film's performance is better than Star Trek (2009). In this one, 95% of the film is about Chris Pine's Captain Kirk's journey and 90% about Kirk and Spock's friendship, and this is, based on most of critics, a much more Star Trek film than Star Trek (2009), but many of them also pointed out that the callbacks might not work to the film's advantage and actually don't play well to some hardcore Trek fans. What you should really be questioning about the underperformance of this movie is what doesn't work on the the side of the marketing strategy and the core creative team, which consists of the producers, writers and the director.

By: couchkik

couchkik — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:16 +0000

What about those overseas Fast6 numbers??

By: Alan B

Alan B — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:15 +0000

Meh. Paramount REPEATEDLY said that the intent was to improve the international box office from the first film. Only 33% of the 2009 film's box office total came from international receipts, which explains why Paramount wanted to broaden Star Trek's market internationally. Considering that STID is doing 80% better than its predecessor internationally, I say it probably worked.

By: Real

Real — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:15 +0000

I think they waited too long to release the sequel to ST 2009. 4 years is a long time between movies.

By: Washington

Washington — Fri, 13 May 2016 09:52:15 +0000

Maybe I was just fucking busy that weekend