various reasons for the underperforming box office
-
mayflowers8 — 9 years ago(November 07, 2016 03:24 PM)
There was no buzz, trailers were poorly edited, no merchandising, and marketing overall was non-existent. I blame Paramount mostly. This movie had 84% Rotten Tomatoes and this is the 50th Anniversary of Star Trek so it's just disappointing that it did the worst out of the three. However, I do think this movie was just not as good as the first two in the franchise due to JJ Abrams leaving.
-
TrevorAclea — 9 years ago(November 07, 2016 03:45 PM)
The marketing wasn't non-existent, it was worse: it was just plain bad. Like John Carter, they spent a lot of money on marketing the film (trailers, TV spots, billboards and print ads were all out there on a fairly large scale), but they spent it badly, mostly on materials that people would see and instantly forget because there was nothing about them to really register (the Times Square 'Beyond' billboard is a classic example: it cost Paramount around $350,000 or more but the word Beyond flying through the sky could just as easily have been a soft drink ad). Nothing about the marketing campaign really made any lasting impression.
"Security - release the badgers." -
bozo_500 — 9 years ago(November 07, 2016 04:13 PM)
Yes they'd have been better off with the TMP style one everywhere (or better still the Korean ones) instead of the big BEYOND
http://i1.wp.com/iheartbillboards.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Star-Trek-Beyond-Times-Square.jpg
At least slap STAR TREK on there!! - like previous ones:
http://iheartbillboards.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Star-Trek-2009-Times-Square.jpg
http://scifanatic.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/stid-timesquare.jpg
http://iheartbillboards.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Star-Trek-The-Motion-Picture.jpg
(its a strange one to use anyway in that the enterprise is in pieces falling from the sky in the film. Maybe it was a response to the STID falling Enterprise poster but it made little sense.) -
fctiger — 9 years ago(November 09, 2016 06:14 AM)
Weren't you the one who kept saying Americans needed to see it more than anyone else? So basically its the rest of the world where it ultimately failed. It wasnt great in America but yes decent, just not as great as the last two. But it must be worrying for Paramount the domestic keep falling with every film so while OK the fact it keeps falling is still a problem.
I dont think Paramount is happy at all to be honest. The film didn't seem to perform really well anywhere and that spells trouble long term.
Marvel 2016: Agents of Shield, Agent Carter, Daredevil, Civil War, Dr. Strange, Luke Cage! -
bozo_500 — 9 years ago(November 30, 2016 02:04 PM)
Beyond - a 'flop' say Forbes man
Star Trek Beyond earned some of the best blockbuster reviews of the summer but couldnt break the Star Trek global glass ceiling. With a $185 million budget, $158m domestic (compared the $256m and $228m North American grosses of the first two reboot offerings) and $343m worldwide (versus $385m and $467m) wasnt nearly enough. Paramount and Skydance must confront that reality that Star Trek is never going to be a top-tier blockbuster franchise.
Flops (8):
Zoolander, No. 2 ($50m/$28m/$55m)
Divergent Series: Allegiant ($110m/$66m/$179m)
The Huntsman: Winters War ($115m/$48m/$164m)
Alice Through the Looking Glass ($170m/$77m/$299m)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows ($135m/$82m/$245m)
Independence Day: Resurgence ($165m/$103m/$389m)
Star Trek Beyond ($185m/$158m/$343m)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/11/30/box-office-shocker-most-sequels-in-2016-didnt-flop/#6768f5137d6d -
bozo_500 — 9 years ago(December 04, 2016 01:15 AM)
*it is no secret that Paramount's rebooted Star Trek, one which filtered the Kirk/Spock adventures through a Star Wars prism, became noticeably less "essential" once the original article came back on the scene,
and I can't imagine that helped Independence Day: Resurgence. I don't expect a similar fate for Guardians of the Galaxy vol 2, if only because audiences absolutely loved the first film, it has the earned Marvel seal of goodwill and we have a rooting interest in the characters.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/12/03/guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2-gets-a-hilarious-trailer-why-it-could-be-summers-biggest-hit/#676676b57661 -
fctiger — 9 years ago(December 04, 2016 01:26 AM)
Interesting. He's suggesting Beyond failed because it was already too much like Star Wars and once SW came back less people didn't need Trek again. I don't know I think thats a bit simplistic. I think it mostly failed because the first trailer was bad, film had no hook and a lot of fans were put off by STID. And the PR behind the scenes didn't make it sound too great although I doubt that any effect on the masses.
I think Beyond just had a problem of getting anyone to care sadly where as TFA everyone was intrigued how the story was going to go down and see what became of Han, Luke and Leia. There was nothing like that in Beyond, it was just another mission gone wrong by a supervilain who wanted revenge on the Federationagain.
As for GOTG 2 trailer wow that was really good. It worked because it clearly brings back nostalgia of the first one but still a very different film from the first one. Beyond second trailer brought back the spirit of Star Trek but it was way too late by then for hard core fans. -
Jade_The_Messenger — 9 years ago(December 05, 2016 11:50 PM)
I think it mostly failed because the first trailer was bad, film had no hook and a lot of fans were put off by STID. And the PR behind the scenes didn't make it sound too great although I doubt that any effect on the masses.
Yeah. Simon Pegg going off on fans and Chris Pine's supposed "who cares?" response were really disappointing.
Just because someone does something good for you, that doesn't mean they're good for you. -
HannahLee_3 — 9 years ago(December 05, 2016 09:58 AM)
Agreed. The first trailer was really off-putting. And the subsequent trailer didn't make up for it.
In addition, I think there was something basic missing from the film itself: wonder and the thrill of exploration and adventure.
The Forbes article mentions that Star Wars sort of fills the "space adventure at the movies" place, but Star Wars typically shows a world that is well-lived in, and aside from the Force, pretty well understood by the main characters. Star Trek could have still carved out unique place as a "space exploration adventure film". But instead they gave us a film with Kirk and Spock both burned out by space travel, with no joy for "seeking out new lives and new civilizations". And the fact that the writers resorted to blowing up the Enterprise and another human Federation officer as villain made it seem that they too had lost of the spark of adventure*. All that came through in the marketing IMO. If the crew of the Enterprise isn't excited about their mission, even in the face of great danger, it is going to be really hard to get audiences thrilled about it.
The first trailer was a non-Trek F & F in Space disaster. But the 2nd trailer made things worse. It's one thing to have Bones playing the reluctant space adventurer; that's his thing. But having Kirk with no spark for exploration and adventure and Spock with no energy for discovery/scientific curiosity, and 2nd trailer with tonal shifts ranging from weary to dismayed, along with destruction of the Enterprise, just made the whole thing a downer.
Some folks who have loved ST for years, like me, went to see the film anyway, in the hopes it would be better than its trailers. But obviously those trailers and other marketing failed to bring in a wider audience. And then a film that was OK with some high points and some disappointing low points failed to build the WOM needed for box office momentum. (As folks have said here, the trailers were a pretty good representation of the film. Unfortunately.) So of course they wound up with disappointing box office results.- And it may extend beyond the writers; see CBS/Paramount's almost complete lack of effort or enthusiasm around the 50th anniversary of the franchise.
Have a lovely day - John Finnemore
- And it may extend beyond the writers; see CBS/Paramount's almost complete lack of effort or enthusiasm around the 50th anniversary of the franchise.
