Star Trek Beyond (2016) (1 Viewer)

[Lou Sytsma]

You forgot to add "in my opinion". [emoji12]

Since I agree with Carabimero let's make it "our" opinion.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Alan and Lou, I respect you guys and love reading your opinions, but I will have to respectfully disagree with you regarding Star Trek Continues. I've only seen the first episode of Continues, so it's entirely possible that it got better past the point that I watched. But I found that first episode to be very very difficult to sit through. I didn't make it more than a few minutes into Of Gods And Men either. Same for the Axanar short film.

I don't begrudge anyone for liking what they like, but for me, I'll take any of the reboots over the fan productions, and I say that as someone who has been watching original Trek for 25 years.

 

[Carabimero]

You forgot to add "in my opinion". [emoji12]

Sometimes I don't feel it's necessary

 

[Carabimero]

Alan and Lou, I respect you guys and love reading your opinions, but I will have to respectfully disagree with you regarding Star Trek Continues. I've only seen the first episode of Continues, so it's entirely possible that it got better past the point that I watched. But I found that first episode to be very very difficult to sit through. I didn't make it more than a few minutes into Of Gods And Men either. Same for the Axanar short film.

I don't begrudge anyone for liking what they like, but for me, I'll take any of the reboots over the fan productions, and I say that as someone who has been watching original Trek for 25 years.

Dollars signs of fans agree with me and Lou. Continues has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, given by fans. It must be doing something right

 

[Tino]

Where can I see these films?

 

[Bryan^H]

Youtube.

I for one think Star Trek Continues is great. Well written, and the details of the production are pretty phenomenal coming from a fan project. It is eerie how close they have come to duplicating the original series in both tone, and writing.

 

[PaulDA]

Youtube.

I for one think Star Trek Continues is great. Well written, and the details of the production are pretty phenomenal coming from a fan project. It is eerie how close they have come to duplicating the original series in both tone, and writing.

I love TOS. My first and favourite Trek series, since 1973. But I also love the Bad Robot movies--mostly because they are NOT a duplicate of the original version. They offer a different perspective on a familiar "universe" that I find refreshing and interesting. In fact, while I enjoyed Beyond, I liked it a bit less than the other two because I found it edging towards the original a bit too much. I already have the original version. YMMV

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Hmmm, we have STC - which I feel is the best fan production based on the original series - and soon to be STD. Logically the next series after that will be STE - Star Trek Explorer.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

You forgot to add "in my opinion". [emoji12]

 

[Sam Favate]

Disappointing if true:

It's Official: 'Star Trek Beyond' Is A Box-Office Flop

http://www.inquisitr.com/3409505/its-official-star-trek-beyond-is-a-box-office-flop/

 

[Tino]

Flop? No. Underperforming? Definitely.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

Disappointing if true:

It's Official: 'Star Trek Beyond' Is A Box-Office Flop

http://www.inquisitr.com/3409505/its-official-star-trek-beyond-is-a-box-office-flop/

What that dubious piece fails to account for is the number of foreign territories that STB has yet to open in because of the Olympics.

 

[Tino]

Exactly. Seems like a click bait website that doesn't understand box office evidenced by this quote from the article.

"As of Thursday night, Box Office Mojo has it at $198.2 million. So, $13 million profit..."

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Only in our bizarre times could a movie make nearly $200 million in under a month and be considered a flop.

For what it's worth, I think Paramount and the theater chains have definitely left money on the table. That's certainly true in my case. I saw Star Trek Into Darkness nine times theatrically, seven of those in IMAX. Part of the reason for that was that STID played in IMAX theaters for over a month, and then - that made it very easy to get out and see it again and and again. When the IMAX prints finished playing at the commercial theaters, they then made a round at museum IMAX theaters. So I was able to see STID well after its release in IMAX.

For Star Trek Beyond, it played in IMAX for less than two full weeks. I wanted to see it in 4DX, for which they charge an astonishing $28.50, but it only played in that format for six days - not enough time for me to get out and see it again before it was gone. I tried to see it in 3D earlier in the week, but the theater that had advertised it as being in 3D started playing the movie in 2D and although they admitted that was incorrect, refused to play it in the format they advertised and charged for - so I politely asked for a refund and left. The overall point being, I'm willing to pay to keep seeing this movie on the big screen in quality theaters in premium formats, but no one is offering me the opportunity to see it that way anymore. What I will not do is spend $16 for a 2D ticket to see it playing on screens that aren't much larger than my own screen at home. For about $25, I'll have the 3D Blu-ray which I will certainly watch a dozen times or so. If it was still in IMAX, 4DX, or even 3D near me, I'd love to be going tonight. Unfortunately, that option isn't available to me. With STID, it had been.

 

[TonyD]

Josh that's the case wit me too.

I was set to go on it's third friday, the second week out and 15th day but it was already out of imax on the day before so I skipped it.

 

[Malcolm R]

I agree. I'm not one to rush right out and see a film in it's first weekend, but I'm also not willing to pay theater ticket prices to sit in one of the closet-sized auditoriums at the back of the multi-plex with the postage-stamp screen. So theaters get less and less of my money.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I doubt Paramount is too upset that the box office.

Sequels to apparently venerable franchises that have underperformed or outright bombed in 2016:

• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows currently has less than half the gross of the first film did at this point in its run.
• Zoolander 2 probably won't break $30 million.
• Alice Through the Looking Glass made less than a quarter of what Alice in Wonderland grossed.
• X-Men: Apocalypse has yet to reach the gross of Bryan Singer's first X-Men film, which is sixteen years old and preceded superhero mania.
• Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising barely made a third of the gross of the original
• The Huntsman: Winter's War made back less than half its budget, and less than a third of the gross of Snow White and the Huntsman
• Independence Day: Resurgence cost more than twice as much to make and barely grossed a third of the original film, and that's not even adjusting for the significant ticket price inflation over the course of the intervening two decades.
• The female Ghostbusters reboot has grossed less than half of what the original grossed, and that's ignoring the even more significant ticket price inflation over the course of the intervening three decades.

Compared to those disasters, Star Trek Beyond currently tracking at 71 percent of Star Trek Into Darkness's domestic box office doesn't look so bad.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I miss the days of an IMAX experience being more selective - when fewer movies were chosen to recieve the IMAX treatment, but those that did stuck around.

I was just thinking that I saw Star Trek '09 about 7 times in theaters - including at least four IMAX viewings. Like STID, when it left IMAX 15/70 theaters, museum screens were able to get it, and I saw it at the New England Aquarium on their gorgeous screen a bunch.

That I saw Star Trek Beyond only three times isn't a reflection on the quality of the movie relative to the others. I loved it. And I really want to see it again on a great screen, but there's just no place to anymore. That's astonishing if you really think about it - NYC is a huge market, with four IMAX theaters in Manhattan alone, plus additional ones in the other boroughs, not to mention probably a dozen or so 4DX, RPX, ETX, and AMC Prime screens combined - and not one of them is playing this three week old movie anymore. The IMAX theaters charge $23 a ticket. I am willing to pay $23 to see this movie, over and over, and no one wants to take my money.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I doubt Paramount is too upset that the box office.

Sequels to apparently venerable franchises that have underperformed or outright bombed in 2016:

• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows currently has less than half the gross of the first film did at this point in its run.
• Zoolander 2 probably won't break $30 million.
• Alice Through the Looking Glass made less than a quarter of what Alice in Wonderland grossed.
• X-Men: Apocalypse has yet to reach the gross of Bryan Singer's first X-Men film, which is sixteen years old and preceded superhero mania.
• Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising barely made a third of the gross of the original
• The Huntsman: Winter's War made back less than half its budget, and less than a third of the gross of Snow White and the Huntsman
• Independence Day: Resurgence cost more than twice as much to make and barely grossed a third of the original film, and that's not even adjusting for the significant ticket price inflation over the course of the intervening two decades.
• The female Ghostbusters reboot has grossed less than half of what the original grossed, and that's ignoring the even more significant ticket price inflation over the course of the intervening three decades.

Compared to those disasters, Star Trek Beyond currently tracking at 71 percent of Star Trek Into Darkness's domestic box office doesn't look so bad.

Only in our crazy world would over $100 million be considered failure.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Only in our crazy world would over $100 million be considered failure.

In the pre-crazy world, a lot of these marginal films would have had budgets in the $40-80 million range instead of the $140-180 million range.

X-Men: First Class made even less than X-Men: Apocalypse did, but Matthew Vaughn kept the budget in check so the expectations were different.