Michael T Hudson

I am guess that includes Thursday as well.

RichC2

Ebert is one guy, there are a ton of movie critics out there. And he gave it 2.5 stating it was entertaining but he hated the science and had seen the story before. Overall from a critical standpoint, it was very well received, one of the years highest rated films and one of the all time highest rated Summer flicks.

Artman

Exactly.... I think a lot of people will be "converted" when they give this one a chance watching it at home later this yr... Whenever I told friends I was seeing it I had to follow with "don't laugh, this one's supposed to be cool!"

So, even if this one only makes 175m or so, I think a sequel could easily do 250-300m.

Blu Man

Whatever. That statement is completely wrong. Yes, some people might have only seen it because of his death, but most didn't. Most of the people I know didn't give a shit that he was dead, they just wanted to see a kick ass movie and they got it. I haven't seen Star Trek yet so I won't judge it, but I can pretty much tell you right now, that it's not at The Dark Knight's level. And the sequel will not be the highest grossing movie ever because alot of people hate Star Trek. I know I do, I think it's total crap. The whole idea I find to be stupid. But some people like it, fine, good for them. I hope they enjoy it. But the fact is that it isn't for the average movie goer, most of the people who will go and see it are Star Trek geeks (again, no offence). The Dark Knight however appeals to the masses and to the critiques. That's what makes it such a good movie. Something the people like and something the critiques like. Star Trek just doesn't have that formula because of it's over done science fiction nature. I'm sure it will do very well for itself, but it won't be a record breaker.

Blu Man

Yeah, I checked on Rotten Tomatos and your right. That's why I deleted my comment.

fumanstan

Damn, was hoping Wolverine would hold a bit better since it's better then the reviews are saying.

Glad to see Star Trek be successful. It has flaws, but is just plain entertaining.

Artman

Well I actually went to the theaters twice this wknd and you might be amazed at just how... normal the moviegoers were. Every age, demographic.... pleasant audiences actually. I was expecting costumes but I didn't see any...

madcougar

I'm wondering what everyone is smoking regarding sequel money. It's not every franchise that enjoys growing box office with subsequent sequels. There is nothing that says a Trek sequel will be more profitable than this one. It could be a complete piece of crap for all we know and bomb.

RichC2

I agree though, it isn't on the same level as Batman Begins, but strictly from an entertainment standpoint, it stands shoulders to shoulders with it. Actually, more so since it didn't really take itself too seriously. And it just seems likely that Star Trek will get a bit more repeat viewing from non-fans dragging other non-fans along, it's just a fun flick. The way I figure it, if Star Wars can appeal to the masses, so can this new Trek. I just hope the sequels don't follow in the vein of the SW prequels... god those were boring.

Artman

What are we smoking? I don't know, hard facts perhaps... Terminator, Austin Powers, Mummy, Matrix, LOTR, X-Men, Batman Begin's 2nd movies all grossed more than their first, some substantially so. Sure it isn't what conventionally happens, but it has and does.

Shannon Nutt

I agree...but I think it compares favorably with Batman Begins and Casino Royale (and I think it's going to wind up making more than either of those movies did). Origin stories are always tough because there's "x" number of things that need to be covered. The next movie can go ANYWHERE.

fumanstan

Umm... are you forgetting about a little something called Star Wars? I don't think anyone thought fantasy like LOTR would appeal to the masses either, but it managed to as well. While I agree it's premature to talk about a sequel doing 400 million, it's silly to count it out right away. Especially when this movie will change the way a lot of people think about the Star Trek franchise.

musick

X3 had a 67% drop second weekend
X2 - 52% drop
X1 - 57% drop

given the competition (ST) taking 72.5 mil of the box office (none of the above had that type of competition) I'd say a 68% drop is pretty darn respectable

Blu Man

Maybe, but I doubt that the Star Trek sequel will be able to overthrough Titanic or The Dark Knight in the box office. I just don't think that's possible. In the next ten years I'm willing to bet that a movie will overthough The Dark Knight (Batman 3?, Avatar?) but I don't think that anything will overthrough Titanic as king in at least the next twenty years. But you never know. And I don't see why people are saying this a better rated film then The Dark Knight because IMDB hs The Dark Knight at number 6, where as Star Trek is number 62. Or is Rotten Tomatos all that matters?

RichC2

I'm afraid 68% in no way is respectable, you can't spin that number. That's a drop inline with Hulk that dropped 69.7%.

Titanic will be a tough for any movie to overthrow as champ. It will have to appeal in equal parts to women and men and 14 year old girls

One person said it was more highly rated and it does statistically have more positive reviews than Dark Knight. That said, the positive reviews for Dark Knight were higher (more 4 outta 4s) than Star Trek's.

Currently though, on both Rotten Tomatoes (counting strictly fresh and rotten) and Metacritic (counting actual score of top critics), Star Trek is slightly higher rated than TDK. TDK has a higher overall critic score on Rotten Tomatoes and has a higher IMDB score. This of course means nothing, and you can just as easily love a movie most people hate and hate a movie most people love.

In otherwords, the reviews are not a good basis to compare the two movies. Star Trek is easier to enjoy than TDK as it's shorter, brighter, and requires less thinking. And there won't really be any Oscar hype for Star Trek come the end of the year. It is what it is, a flashy piece of pop entertainment. But damn is it entertaining.

musick

there is no spin needed it is a respectable drop
The Hulk as you sighted droped 69.7% and still came in second place to the debut of Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle which only opened at 37.6 mil

as I said Wolverine dropped 68% and was still in second place to Star Trek which took in 72.5 mil and is a genre movie that would take more of the audience away from a superhero based movie than CA

I stand by my statement

RichC2

I'll have to disagree with that, but no biggie theres plenty of room for multiple opinions on the matter. I didn't realize Hellboy II had such a massive drop (70.7%), not so surprised Watchmen (67.7%) and Street Fighter ('09) (68.5%).

musick

no biggie here as well and you are free to disagree but if you are going to offer one of "multiple opinions" you might want to have backup to your claim

chris_sc77

Looks like Battle for Terra is going to end up with at least the 3rd biggest 2nd weekend drop EVER!!!!!!! (It fell over 83%).
Wolverine dropped what it was expected to drop this weekend.
It will be interestng to see how Star Trek holds up thats for sure.

RichC2

You mean like how Spider-man on Weekend 3 dropped only 36.9% to $45m, this despite the fact it was going against Star Wars Episode II which opened to over $80m? Seems like they would be drawing from the same audience and all. (To note, it dropped 38% in its second weekend. Though it didn't have any real competition.) Unfortunately finding specific examples of a Comic Book movie going aginst a Sci-fi flick is a little difficult, most studios are smarter than Fox and don't plan their release for a week before another major movie.

Tracking most other "popular" comic book movies, the 60%+ drop range is generally reserved for the movies that weren't received well:

X-men had 57% drop, X2 had a 53% drop - both reasonably received. X3 though had a 67% drop. Similarly, Wolverine had a 68% drop. Seeing as how X3 had a 2.2x multiplier (opened with $102m, finished with $223m), Wolverine should wind up with about a 2x multiplier meaning it should stall out at around $160m. Not terrible but that is one of the lower sums for a current super hero flick.

Spider-man had a 38% drop (3.5x multiplier), Spider-man 2 had a 49% drop (hard to determine multiplier since it was July 4th, but strictly compared it wound up with nearly a 4x multiplier), Spider-man 3 had a 61.5% drop (2.25x multiplier). I guess I'm going on the slant that movie dropped massively on it's 2nd weekend because it just wasn't good. That said, I can't quite prove that it's a "bad drop" since I don't work the backends, but it has to be seen as somewhat of a disappointment for Fox and isn't holding up well in the overall scheme of things.

Additionally, it will join Fast & Furious (Will likely end up around $156m) and The Simpsons Movie ($183m) as the only other movies to open above $70m and not break $200m. (Twilight is extremely close but doesn't make the cut. Opening with $69.6m)

Of course, this ignores the little details, like Overseas But that said, it isn't a flop akin to Watchmen (We're now in the era of the $100m flop, weird.) and the massive opening shows there is interest in this kind of spin-off so the franchise is safe. But still, not a good drop, and hopefully Fox will take this to heart and take the time to make the sequel good.

musick

no this is not what I mean
if you want to compare the first Spider-Man movie to Wolverine (in effect the 4th X-Men movie) to prove your point go ahead

most comic book movies don't have legs (no SM joke intended) they open big and have an over 50% drop in their second week (most without any major competition) and continue to fall... the exceptions are few SM1, IM, Batman Begins, TDK

a 68% drop for Wolverine second week with ST taking 72.5 of the box office that week is not out of line

RichC2

The difference between legs and no legs sort of lies in those margins tho. We aren't talking a 50% drop here, which is common for most summer flicks superheroes/comic books or not. A flick with a 32.5% drop is deemed one with excellent legs. Next stop, 50% which is more or less average. Then you have 68.5% in this case, I just don't see how that can be seen as anything but abnormally high.

mdc3000

I'm interested to see how the next few weeks play out...Word of mouth on Star Trek is phenomenal but I still know people hesitant to see it because of the stigma of the franchise (NERD!)... also, I have yet to meet anyone who thought The DaVinci Code or Night At The Museum were anything but disappointments, so I'm curious to see how the sequels open - I hated DVC but love the Angels & Demons book, so I'll check it out, but review for Museum would have to be extremely glowing for me to try that one - fool me once... I think Terminator will open pretty well but kids are a huge force so Museum might take that weekend.

wm lopez

Ebert gave Next Day Air a good review.
Maybe his wife had something to do with that.

chris_sc77

Are you inferring that just because Roger Ebert is married to a middle aged black woman he would give a positive review to a new urban action comedy about a delivery driver unloading cocaine to the wrong address?