test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Ten Forward

For all the JJ haters out there, here's one more reason to give him a break.

hawkwing43hawkwing43 Member Posts: 1,701 Arc User
edited June 2013 in Ten Forward
Just base on gross box office money made by each film, this is a rough guess of the money to date:

1. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) - Worlwide Box Office Gross: $139 Million

2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $97 Million

3. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $87 Million

4. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $133 Million

5. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $63 Million

6. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $96.9 Million

7. Star Trek Generations (1994) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $118 million

8. Star Trek: First Contact (1996) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $146 Million

9. Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $112 Million

10. Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $67 Million

11. Star Trek (2009) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $385.5 million

12. Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $330.5 Million (as of June 3, 2013)

Now I know it's different times different money scales, but still this isn't bad money. So if nothing else he knows how to bring in the cash.
Post edited by hawkwing43 on
«1

Comments

  • UnknownUnknown
    edited June 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • lordvalecortezlordvalecortez Member Posts: 479 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    hawkwing43 wrote: »
    Just base on gross box office money made by each film, this is a rough guess of the money to date:

    1. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) - Worlwide Box Office Gross: $471.4 Million

    2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $236.9 Million

    3. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $197.1 Million

    4. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $279.3 Million

    5. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $120 Million

    6. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $166.2 Million

    7. Star Trek Generations (1994) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $185.8 million

    8. Star Trek: First Contact (1996) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $218.3 Million

    9. Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $159.4 Million

    10. Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $87 Million

    11. Star Trek (2009) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $421 million

    12. Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) - Worldwide Box Office Gross: $330.5 Million (as of June 3, 2013)

    Now I know it's different times different money scales, but still this isn't bad money. So if nothing else he knows how to bring in the cash.

    I adjusted everything to today's (2013) Dollars.

    Edited to be correct now.
    Cheers from Antonio Valerio Cortez III, Half-Celestial Archduke of the Free Marches Confederacy.
  • shevetshevet Member Posts: 1,667 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    I've nothing in particular against JJ Abrams, but... so what?

    If there's one thing I've learned over years of watching and reading the good and the bad, it's that popularity and quality have no discernible relationship to each other. (Shakespeare and Dickens were among the most popular authors of their day... many other popular authors of the same day have fallen into well-deserved obscurity.)

    So, to my mind, box-office numbers prove absolutely nothing about whether a film's worth seeing - one way or the other.
    8b6YIel.png?1
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    lordvalecortez wrote: »
    I adjusted everything to today's (2013) Dollars.

    I think you made an error in Star Trek: Insurrection. 1 billion dollars seems too high for that movie.
  • anazondaanazonda Member Posts: 8,399 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    In all this, did you take inflation into account?

    No?

    Thought so.
    Don't look silly... Don't call it the "Z-Store/Zen Store"...
    pwebranflakes wrote: »
    Let me put the rumors to rest: it's definitely still the C-Store (Cryptic Store) It just takes ZEN.
    Like Duty Officers? Support effords to gather ideas
  • lordvalecortezlordvalecortez Member Posts: 479 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    anazonda wrote: »
    In all this, did you take inflation into account?

    No?

    Thought so.

    See my post above.
    Cheers from Antonio Valerio Cortez III, Half-Celestial Archduke of the Free Marches Confederacy.
  • marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    That's no reason to overlook any of the reasons people dislike him or his 'work' :rolleyes:
  • redclaw30redclaw30 Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Maybe you should mention the budgets of the movies. Then you will realize, that the new movies are not that successful in financial terms.

    Star Trek (2009) had a budget of $ 150 Millions, this is a profit of 180%.
    Into the Darkness had a budget of $ 190 Millions, profit of 73% (but still growing).

    The profits of the older Movies are comparable, most were more profitable.

    Star Trek: 200%
    Star Trek II: 766%
    Star Trek III: 443%
    Star Trek IV: 533%
    Star Trek V: 90%
    Star Trek VI: 250%
    Star Trek VII: 227%
    Star Trek VIII: 224%
    Star Trek IX: 93 %
    Star Trek X: 11%

    You see, in financial terms the second, third and fourth movie were awesome, the new ones are just (expensive) standard.

    Feel free to compare Abrams profits to other Sci-Fi-Movies (E. T., Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Avatar, all six Star Wars-Movies etc.) and you will determin: He is just overestimated.
  • pweistheworstpweistheworst Member Posts: 986 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    No offense to you or JJ, but Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (arguably the WORST Star Wars film of all time) grossed $474,544,677 domestically in 1999 dollars ... which would be worth $665,560,556.80 in 2013 thanks to inflation.

    Just because people pay money to watch a movie doesn't mean the movie is good.

    According to boxofficemojo.com there are 66 feature films that have domestic grosses greater than the first "JJ Trek" film and more than 20 of those films I would personally say are absolutely horrible.

    Again, ticket sales don't really speak to the quality of a film or a director ... it just speaks to how willing the public was to pay for tickets.

    It's probably why there is no Oscar given for highest box office gross.
    In the immortal words of Captain Sisko: "It may not be what you believe, but that doesn't make it wrong."

    Don't believe the lies in this forum. I am NOT an ARC user. I play STO on Steam or not at all.
  • captainbaileycaptainbailey Member Posts: 356 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Also to the OP you have to remember most of the older Trek movies say 1-6 where in HALF as many theatres as the new ones. IF YOU DOUBLED the theatres they were in back then they MAY have made even more money and in turn been even more profitable than JJ TRASHTREK
  • drogyn1701drogyn1701 Member Posts: 3,606 Media Corps
    edited June 2013
    A few days ago I was reminded of a Churchill quote on fanatics which I've paraphrased into: "A hater is someone who won't change their mind and won't change the subject."

    A critic will say what they have to say and move on, but a hater will just. never. stop. hating. on whatever subject has drawn their ire until you just have to ignore/unfriend/unfollow them. My advice is don't try. Let people think what they want to think. Let the haters hate on JJ and on the films while you get to enjoy them, which for me personally is far more fun than hating.
    The Foundry Roundtable live Saturdays at 7:30PM EST/4:30PM PST on twitch.tv/thefoundryroundtable
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    To me, this is the bottom line: either the franchise moves forward or it dies.

    To me, dies is unacceptable...
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • cptwilliam2cptwilliam2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    I would argue sales are a pretty bad metric for quality or even as a sign of good or bad.

    Some great films make awful money at the box office, while much worse films take in bucket loads.

    Not to mention inflation,economic conditions at time of release, date of release, budget vs profit, and number of theaters released.

    Also, in terms of sales numbers, how much of the boost was caused by 3D vs 2D prices?



    Lets say for argument sake, it brought in a lot of money. Some might say, whatever keeps the franchise alive. If the franchise is kept alive by taking away its soul, is it worth it?
    Join Legends Memorial, a chat channel to share stories about the legends of Trek who are no longer with us.
  • daveynydaveyny Member Posts: 8,227 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    The only Folks that need to truly care about how well JJ-Trek does, is BAD ROBOT...

    They are producing the features and stand to lose the most, if the movies don't make a reasonable profit.

    Paramount as a movie making entity, loses very little in the grand scheme of things, as we have seen since the release of NEMESIS.
    STO Member since February 2009.
    I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
    Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
    upside-down-banana-smiley-emoticon.gif
  • mirrorchaosmirrorchaos Member Posts: 9,844 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    hahaha.

    how is ST11 and ST12 better domestically when ST1 beat them out right on domestic earnings?

    if anything the jj haters still have the upper hand in this fight, thanks for the extra reason to keep me away from 11 and 12, jjcrapverse can rot in hell as far as i am concerned. thats the last i will write of it.
    T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW.
    Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
  • koihimenakamurakoihimenakamura Member Posts: 135 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Two things

    1. Gross isn't really an indicator of good, although I do kinda hope the movies keep grossing well. Increases the chance of a TV series, and I do want to give it a chance for one

    2. Yeah, uh. It's not even the highest returns...
  • lordmalak1lordmalak1 Member Posts: 4,681 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    redclaw30 wrote: »
    Maybe you should mention the budgets of the movies. Then you will realize, that the new movies are not that successful in financial terms.

    Star Trek (2009) had a budget of $ 150 Millions, this is a profit of 180%.
    Into the Darkness had a budget of $ 190 Millions, profit of 73% (but still growing).

    The profits of the older Movies are comparable, most were more profitable.

    Star Trek: 200%
    Star Trek II: 766%
    Star Trek III: 443%
    Star Trek IV: 533%
    Star Trek V: 90%
    Star Trek VI: 250%
    Star Trek VII: 227%
    Star Trek VIII: 224%
    Star Trek IX: 93 %
    Star Trek X: 11%

    You see, in financial terms the second, third and fourth movie were awesome, the new ones are just (expensive) standard.

    Feel free to compare Abrams profits to other Sci-Fi-Movies (E. T., Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Avatar, all six Star Wars-Movies etc.) and you will determin: He is just overestimated.

    Good info, shows that ST9 was slightly higher grossing than "wat does god need with a starship"
    :D
    KBF Lord MalaK
    Awoken Dead
    giphy.gif

    Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
  • hawkwing43hawkwing43 Member Posts: 1,701 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Mainly I did this post to show that JJ isn't doing bad in sales of the product. Some people make it sound like if it's not Prime, it's not right. ok lets say you stay the course as it was, looking at the number you seen a drop off in the brand name, even the TV show Enterprise didn't make it to a season 7 like the other 3 newer shows. So without giving up rights or control, CBS and Paramount went with a reboot of the Brand, and JJ was put as head of that reboot, under Bad Robot. For what JJ wanted to really do, it didn't pan out like he wanted, so he's moved on to Star Wars. Does it mean he will have nothing to do with the next Star Trek? No I am sure he will still have a hand in it, but to just toss out his vision of Trek, well...........to me it's just not right. He has if nothing else, put new energy into the brand, and if that means we are now stuck with the new verse. Then so be it.

    BUT...............


    If we as fans do our part, WE can get a show that we love back on TV, I choose not to nit pick this new version of Trek, just make it known what you really want to the people that count, and maybe just maybe you will get something you like. As it stands now, as long as a they are making money on the current brand model, I don't see anything different coming down the pipe.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    cptwilliam2 wrote: »
    I would argue sales are a pretty bad metric for quality or even as a sign of good or bad.

    Some great films make awful money at the box office, while much worse films take in bucket loads.

    Not to mention inflation,economic conditions at time of release, date of release, budget vs profit, and number of theaters released.

    Also, in terms of sales numbers, how much of the boost was caused by 3D vs 2D prices?



    Lets say for argument sake, it brought in a lot of money. Some might say, whatever keeps the franchise alive. If the franchise is kept alive by taking away its soul, is it worth it?
    "lost it's soul"? no no it hasn't... and soul is pointless to debate anyways...
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • pegasuscicpegasuscic Member Posts: 157 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    To each their own. I enjoy most of the TOS Trek movies(5s a bit iffy) and only two of the TNG ones. I actualy enjoy JJs Trek more than all the TNG ones and all but 2 of the TOS ones. And I am a lifelong Trek fan. My kids didn't grow up on old Trek, but love JJs Trek and my brother-in-law who is not a Trek fan really likes JJs Trek. So if it keeps the franchise alive in more than some online game, I'm good with it. Plus, who's really the fool in all of this? JJ or the people on these forums criticizing his films? Obviously, you spent the $7 to $8 bucks(if you did a matinee) or more to see the film even if you dont' like JJ Trek. So he still got your money(or the studio did). If you didn't see it and are still on here criticizing, then your just talking out your butt and aren't qualified to give an opinion.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."-Commander William Adama
  • pegasuscicpegasuscic Member Posts: 157 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    mirrorchaos wrote: »
    hahaha.

    how is ST11 and ST12 better domestically when ST1 beat them out right on domestic earnings?

    if anything the jj haters still have the upper hand in this fight, thanks for the extra reason to keep me away from 11 and 12, jjcrapverse can rot in hell as far as i am concerned. thats the last i will write of it.

    So it's a "jjcrapverse" but you admit to never seeing them because you say you've been "kept away". So you are one of the people who is offering an opinion, "jjcrapverse", on something you have never seen. You should run for US Congress, you'd fit right in.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."-Commander William Adama
  • lordmalak1lordmalak1 Member Posts: 4,681 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    pegasuscic wrote: »
    To each their own. I enjoy most of the TOS Trek movies(5s a bit iffy) and only two of the TNG ones. I actualy enjoy JJs Trek more than all the TNG ones and all but 2 of the TOS ones. And I am a lifelong Trek fan. My kids didn't grow up on old Trek, but love JJs Trek and my brother-in-law who is not a Trek fan really likes JJs Trek. So if it keeps the franchise alive in more than some online game, I'm good with it. Plus, who's really the fool in all of this? JJ or the people on these forums criticizing his films? Obviously, you spent the $7 to $8 bucks(if you did a matinee) or more to see the film even if you dont' like JJ Trek. So he still got your money(or the studio did). If you didn't see it and are still on here criticizing, then your just talking out your butt and aren't qualified to give an opinion.

    I'm not the fool because I've seen his first POS attempt on cable as well as most of his attempts at television series. The wife loves his TRIBBLE, but just last night I saw a trailer for yet another JJ T.V. series ,that involved time travel and I looked at the wife and asked her if she see's a pattern. Even she's beginning to see the time travel gimmick as J.J.'s only trick pony.

    My 8 bucks went for beer, to help the time go by faster as I'm playing STO.
    KBF Lord MalaK
    Awoken Dead
    giphy.gif

    Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
  • cptjhuntercptjhunter Member Posts: 2,288 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Didn't this topic surface a month ago? Are we regurgitating this again?:rolleyes:
  • gfreeman98gfreeman98 Member Posts: 1,200 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Two points:
    Correcting for inflation is required as someone did, but remember too that ticket prices are higher now as well. Instead of raw box office revenue Hollywood should really be measuring and comparing total # of tickets sold.

    Everyone keeps talking about the "JJ haters", yet the ones that seem to post the most are the "JJ defenders". I just don't get it; you either like the new Trek or you don't. I am in the latter category, but my opinion has nothing to do with WHO directed it.
    screenshot_2015-03-01-resize4.png
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    cptjhunter wrote: »
    Didn't this topic surface a month ago? Are we regurgitating this again?:rolleyes:
    It's been a recurring thing ever since 2009....

    In other news, your sig is epic.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • scruffyvulcanscruffyvulcan Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    mirrorchaos wrote: »
    hahaha.

    how is ST11 and ST12 better domestically when ST1 beat them out right on domestic earnings?

    if anything the jj haters still have the upper hand in this fight, thanks for the extra reason to keep me away from 11 and 12, jjcrapverse can rot in hell as far as i am concerned. thats the last i will write of it.

    Just curious... if you haven't even watched those movies, why do you hate them so passionately?
  • steamwrightsteamwright Member Posts: 2,820
    edited June 2013
    I'd be curious to see how many tickets each sold. There's not only the difference in currency value from '79 to the present, but tickets may not have matched inflation rates each step of the way. Not that it would change anything, I'm just curious.

    There's other variables like breadth of distribution, etc. The Motion Picture may not have been as widely available as more recent movies.
  • gfreeman98gfreeman98 Member Posts: 1,200 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    Yes as someone pointed out, the movie-going audience has expanded greatly since then, and thus the number of theaters has increased globally.
    screenshot_2015-03-01-resize4.png
  • pleasenonamepleasenoname Member Posts: 19 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    He blew up 2 planets. I can't forgive that. What if a small child tries to emulate what they see JJ portraying on screen.
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited June 2013
    lordmalak1 wrote: »
    I'm not the fool because I've seen his first POS attempt on cable as well as most of his attempts at television series. The wife loves his TRIBBLE, but just last night I saw a trailer for yet another JJ T.V. series ,that involved time travel and I looked at the wife and asked her if she see's a pattern. Even she's beginning to see the time travel gimmick as J.J.'s only trick pony.

    My 8 bucks went for beer, to help the time go by faster as I'm playing STO.

    Maybe a remake of Van Damme's "Timecop" by JJ is in order? That's right up the alley!
    XzRTofz.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.