Star Trek Falls 76%!
Unknown
2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
for Star Trek.
Dirty Red
>2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
>3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
>4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
>5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
>6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
>7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
>8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
>9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
>10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
>11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
>12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
I take it those are Friday's results. Maybe you should wait for results from
the ENTIRE weekend.
Stan Horwitz
: 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
: 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
: 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
: 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
: 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
: 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
: 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
: 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
: 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
: 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
: 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
: 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
: Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
: for Star Trek.
Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
the two movies that beat ST this weekend? Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
Wade Greiner
Stan Horwitz wrote in message <75j8r4$557$1...@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>...
Well, I don't think the problem is so much being behind Hanks & Ryan, and
Disney, the hard thing that I'm sure the Star Trek money watchers are
worried about is that the income went down a rather horrid 76% from the last
Friday intake. Of course there is always a significant decreases the
weekend after the opening, but 76% is huge. Now they may have rebound on
Sat. but that is, frankly, pretty unlikely. Unless a miracle happens one
has to wonder if this film is going to make even $70 mil domestic. Not good
considering the rising actor salaries for this series. Maybe it is time to
bring in a Deep Space Nine movie... I have a feeling they can sign that
cast a lot cheaper... :-)
Jonathan J. Hunt
This doesn't look too promising. What was the budget on Insurrection?
Anybody know? I wonder if they'll break even. Of course what we're not
seeing is the billions of dollars they make on ST merchandising each year.
They can afford to take a loss on movies & think of them as advertising
for the mighty ST merchandising machine as long as we keep buying our
Spock ears & communicator badges.
Peace,
JJH
>>==--> Jonathan | E-mail: cs...@eiu.edu <--==<<
>>==--> Jax | To send e-mail please make sure you use <--==<<
>>==--> Hunt | this address - my news reader messes up. <--==<<
Mr. Zoom
words for the edification of the readers of rec.arts.startrek.current,
let's see if they are worth reading:
> This doesn't look too promising. What was the budget on Insurrection?
> Anybody know? I wonder if they'll break even. Of course what we're not
> seeing is the billions of dollars they make on ST merchandising each year.
> They can afford to take a loss on movies & think of them as advertising
> for the mighty ST merchandising machine as long as we keep buying our
> Spock ears & communicator badges.
> Peace,
> JJH
The Internet Movie Database (http://us.imdb.com) lists the budget as $70
million, but I read an article recently (I think it may have been on
Yahoo!) that said they actually came in _under_ budget, around $60M.
mr. zoom
--
===zooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom
Edward "Mr. Zoom" Curtis ICQ # 9628448
Author of the "Handicapped Encounter Christ" webpage
http://welcome.to/encounter-christ
Please include this sig when replying by e-mail.
Russell Christiansen
"Mr. Zoom" wrote:
> On 20 Dec 1998 11:56:42 -0600, Jonathan J. Hunt posted the following
> words for the edification of the readers of rec.arts.startrek.current,
> let's see if they are worth reading:
> > This doesn't look too promising. What was the budget on Insurrection?
> > Anybody know? I wonder if they'll break even. Of course what we're not
> > seeing is the billions of dollars they make on ST merchandising each year.
> > They can afford to take a loss on movies & think of them as advertising
> > for the mighty ST merchandising machine as long as we keep buying our
> > Spock ears & communicator badges.
> > Peace,
> > JJH
>
> The Internet Movie Database (http://us.imdb.com) lists the budget as $70
> million, but I read an article recently (I think it may have been on
> Yahoo!) that said they actually came in _under_ budget, around $60M.
Something tells me I can see many people wanting the movie one way, with a bunch
of theater seats at the bottom of the screen. Even though I liked it at first,
I'm wondering if I can see many people dreaming of seeing the movie with a bunch
of theater seats across the bottom of the screen and a guy and two robots
riffing it.
- Russell Christiansen
Spock23087
that the odds of a new movie or a new TV show have just taken a dump,
especially as long as Berman and co. remain firmly entrenched.
Dave
>for Star Trek.
The boards had this conversation right after ST:TMP came out. Gloom and
Doom twenty five years ago, gloom and doom now. What was your real reason
for this post? Star Trek will be around for many years to come. This
current movie will do fine world wide.
AMSNYD
From: "Wade Greiner" <wa...@springnet1.com>
Date: Sun, Dec 20, 1998 11:14 AM
Message-id: <dfaf2.2493$HN5....@news12.ispnews.com>
Stan Horwitz wrote in message <75j8r4$557$1...@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>...
>CRT22 () wrote:
>: 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
>: 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
>: 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
>: 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
>: 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
>: 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
>: 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
>: 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
>: 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
>: 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
>: 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
>: 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
>:
>: Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
>: for Star Trek.
>
>Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
>the two movies that beat ST this weekend? Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
>and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
>production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
>that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
>
Well, I don't think the problem is so much being behind Hanks & Ryan, and
Disney,<<
Er, Disney wasn't behind Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks was.
--
Aaron Snyder
asn...@mail.usmo.com or ams...@aol.com
Member of the AAA
"I weigh about 140 pounds, naked. I mean, if that scale at the train station
is anything to go by." -Emo Phillips
AMSNYD
Date: Sun, Dec 20, 1998 5:07 PM
Message-id: <75k02d$4dk6$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>
>Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
>for Star Trek.
The boards had this conversation right after ST:TMP came out. Gloom and
Doom twenty five years ago, gloom and doom now. What was your real reason
for this post? Star Trek will be around for many years to come. This
current movie will do fine world wide.<<
I think Paramount needs to fire Berman and the writers, keep Frakes directing,
and cancel all the tv shows, then, in 3 years, make another film. Or
concentrate on tv and cancel the movies. The overkill of 2 tv series and a
movie every 2 years is hurting Star Trek.
Wade Greiner
AMSNYD wrote in message <19981220181738...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>>Subject: Re: Star Trek Falls 76%!
....
>>Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
>>the two movies that beat ST this weekend? Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
>>and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
>>production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
>>that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
>>
>
>Well, I don't think the problem is so much being behind Hanks & Ryan, and
>Disney,<<
>
>Er, Disney wasn't behind Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks was.
>--
>Aaron Snyder
Oops, of course you are correct. I was just reading what was in front of me
without thinking... That does make the original poster's point even worse,
though. Dreamworks doesn't seem to have nearly the publicity power machine
that Disney has...
Russell Christiansen
> 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
> 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
> 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
> 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
> 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
> 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
> 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
> 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
> 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
> 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
> 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
> 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
>
> Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> for Star Trek.
No. This can't be worse than "Star Trek V." It's already grossed in $35
million. Also, you have to be aware of the fact that this is the time
for Christmas shopping, and the two movies "You've Got Mail" and "Prince
Of Egypt" were just released, and a lot of people probably would want to
see these more than Insurrection. And in this case, it seems the numbers
went down to many people a little too hard. It needs $20 million more to
surpass "Star Trek V," and I bet it'll do it. Or are you guys going to
whine about the 76% drop, just because it's THAT big a deal to you? Hey,
it's Number 3 on the lists here, it can't be all that bad now, can't it.
- Russell Christiansen
S.Knight
(CRT22) wrote:
> 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
> 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
> 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
> 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
> 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
> 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
> 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
> 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
> 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
> 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
> 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
> 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
>
> Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> for Star Trek.
Uh no. those are Friday's numbers. Insurrection made an
estimated 8 million for the weekend. What you need to
remember is this is December where most people are
Christmas shopping so that's going to affect the numbers.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
CmdrAJD
>million. Also, you have to be aware of the fact that this is the time
>for Christmas shopping, and the two movies "You've Got Mail" and "Prince
>Of Egypt" were just released, and a lot of people probably would want to
>see these more than Insurrection. And in this case, it seems the numbers
>went down to many people a little too hard. It needs $20 million more to
>surpass "Star Trek V," and I bet it'll do it. Or are you guys going to
>whine about the 76% drop, just because it's THAT big a deal to you? Hey,
>it's Number 3 on the lists here, it can't be all that bad now, can't it.
>
>- Russell Christiansen
>
Agreed. And if everyone is really that concerned about the prospects for
another movie, go out and see Insurrection again. We're the core audience; if
we don't support the film, no one else will. Devoted Trek fans have kept the
franchise alive through cancellation, syndication, animation, and probably
several other -ations that aren't occuring to me right now. I seriously doubt
it's going to die now.
Alan Decker
Cmd...@aol.com
Keeper of the Star Traks web page
http://members.aol.com/CmdrAJD/sttraks.html
Like Star Trek? Like comedy? Like them mushed together into one gloppy whole?
Then, have we got a site for you!
Plain and Simple Cronan
Stan Horwitz wrote
>: Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
>: for Star Trek.
>
>Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
>the two movies that beat ST this weekend?
Yes. But you don't.
> Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
>and Disney's behind Egypt.
POE was produced by Dreamworks. Regardless, a 70% drop off for any film is
considered catastrophic.
Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
>production is nothing to feel bad about.
Being beaten is one thing, being bloodied and left in a sack with wild
rodents chewing on your testicles is another.
>I am quite impressed that with
>that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
That's because you're a moron.
P&SC
David E. Powell
>
>AMSNYD wrote in message <19981220181738...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>>>Subject: Re: Star Trek Falls 76%!
>>From: "Wade Greiner" <wa...@springnet1.com>
>
>....
>>>and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
>>>production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
>>>that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
>>>
>>Disney,<<
>>
>>Er, Disney wasn't behind Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks was.
>>--
>>Aaron Snyder
>
>Oops, of course you are correct. I was just reading what was in front of
me
>without thinking... That does make the original poster's point even worse,
>though. Dreamworks doesn't seem to have nearly the publicity power machine
>that Disney has...
They're pretty close, though...
David Powell
David B.
> In article <dfaf2.2493$HN5....@news12.ispnews.com>,
> Wade Greiner <wa...@springnet1.com> wrote:
> >
> >Stan Horwitz wrote in message <75j8r4$557$1...@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>...
> >>CRT22 () wrote:
> >>: 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
> >>: 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
> >>: 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
> >>: 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
> >>: 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
> >>: 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
> >>: 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
> >>: 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
> >>: 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
> >>: 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
> >>: 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
> >>: 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
> >>:
> >>: Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> >>: for Star Trek.
> >>
> >>Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
> >>the two movies that beat ST this weekend? Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
> >>and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
> >>production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
> >>that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
> >>
> >
> >Well, I don't think the problem is so much being behind Hanks & Ryan, and
> >Disney, the hard thing that I'm sure the Star Trek money watchers are
> >worried about is that the income went down a rather horrid 76% from the last
> >Friday intake. Of course there is always a significant decreases the
> >weekend after the opening, but 76% is huge. Now they may have rebound on
> >Sat. but that is, frankly, pretty unlikely. Unless a miracle happens one
> >has to wonder if this film is going to make even $70 mil domestic. Not good
> >considering the rising actor salaries for this series. Maybe it is time to
> >bring in a Deep Space Nine movie... I have a feeling they can sign that
> >cast a lot cheaper... :-)
> >
> >
> >
>
> This doesn't look too promising. What was the budget on Insurrection?
> Anybody know? I wonder if they'll break even. Of course what we're not
> seeing is the billions of dollars they make on ST merchandising each year.
> They can afford to take a loss on movies & think of them as advertising
> for the mighty ST merchandising machine as long as we keep buying our
> Spock ears & communicator badges.
> Peace,
> JJH
>
Exactly why even if Insurrection doesn't do as well as hoped for by Paramount
that there will still be more films.
Francis M'stein
wrote in article <75k02d$4dk6$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>:
> >Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> >for Star Trek.
>
> The boards had this conversation right after ST:TMP came out. Gloom and
> Doom twenty five years ago, gloom and doom now. What was your real reason
> for this post? Star Trek will be around for many years to come. This
> current movie will do fine world wide.
It has to end someday. And rather sooner than later...
Francis (To email, replace 'holland' with 'nl')
- - - - - -
"One, two, three, ten! I'm gonna make you manly men."
The Red Guy, in Cow & Chicken's 'Confused'
Francis M'stein
article <367d3...@news.eiu.edu>:
> Of course what we're not
> seeing is the billions of dollars they make on ST merchandising each year.
> They can afford to take a loss on movies & think of them as advertising
> for the mighty ST merchandising machine as long as we keep buying our
> Spock ears & communicator badges.
But who the hell does that, anyway? Li'l kiddies?
Francis M'stein
<367ca47c...@news.mindspring.com>:
> Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> for Star Trek.
Excellent. I hope the message gets through.
Maybe Voyager could get cancelled as a side effect? Here's
hoping...
Ray Martinez
>out of curiosity, what big movies were released when ST V came out?
>I seem to remember Walter Konieg mentioning in an interview that a cpl of
>big movies were released at the same time.
>
>
One word: BATMAN
Ray Martinez
>On Sun, 20 Dec 1998 07:19:42 GMT (CRT22) wrote in article
><367ca47c...@news.mindspring.com>:
>
>> Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
>> for Star Trek.
>
> Excellent. I hope the message gets through.
>
> Maybe Voyager could get cancelled as a side effect? Here's
>hoping...
>
IMHO. . .
Insurrection and First Contact both dropped off
dramatically in the second weekend.
I wonder if people really do like the original cast
better. Maybe they are tired of Star Trek. Any film series that
has gone on this long is bound to have diminishing returns.
Russell Christiansen
Well, maybe they also need a break. Or maybe they have "Voyager syndrome"
- Russell Christiansen
Andre Viens
>out of curiosity, what big movies were released when ST V came out?
>I seem to remember Walter Konieg mentioning in an interview that a cpl of
>big movies were released at the same time.
Batman, Ghostbusters II, Karate Kid III...
---
Andre C. Viens
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2407/
To reply, remove the nospam from my e-mail address.
cliff
Trekkie6O8
> better. Maybe they are tired of Star Trek. Any film series that
> has gone on this long is bound to have diminishing returns.
The major problem with that theory is that returns *haven't* been
diminishing. "First Contact" was the second-highest grossing Trek of all time
and had the highest gross worldwide.
"Generations" was also in the upper half of the films and it remains to be
seen where "Insurrection" will fall.
Other facts, such as the fact that TNG's ratings were four times the
ratings TOS ever reached, and I'd definately say that the TOS crew is no more
popular than the TNG crew.
Remember, week-to-week box office returns mean nothing. The only thing
that matters is what the movie ends its run with. Trek movies, all of them,
have seen major dips after the first weekend. It's simply a function of having
that huge Trekkie audience.
-Greg
Trekkie6O8
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/7784
The Star Trek Nielsen Ratings Database
PhineasBg
>ratings TOS ever reached, and I'd definately say that the TOS crew is no more
>popular than the TNG crew.
Please remember that the Nielson ratings standards were different back then.
They say that if the ratings standards they use *now* were used back then, TOS
would've been considered a huge smash hit.
_______________________________________________
Jay B. (Phin...@aol.com)
Visit THE CAPTAIN KIRK PAGE at:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/4537/kirk.html
_______________________________________________
Richard
> cliff wrote in message <_iXf2.271$RU3...@nnrp2.clara.net>...
> >out of curiosity, what big movies were released when ST V came out?
> >I seem to remember Walter Konieg mentioning in an interview that a cpl of
> >big movies were released at the same time.
>
> Batman, Ghostbusters II, Karate Kid III...
Don't forget "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" - the reason
why Sean Connery wasn't available to play Sybok (though one
wonders if he would have accepted the role if he had been
available).
Richard
Trekkie6O8
They say that if the ratings standards they use *now* were used back then, TOS
would've been considered a huge smash hit.>>
I'm sorry, but that's not true. The number of people represented by a
ratings point have changed, yes. However, if you go by share, which is a
constant percentage, TOS's ratings were roughly equivalent to Voyager's current
ratings.
The ratings system changes in its ratio relationships, but the
representation remains the same. TOS was never a smash hit on TV and that
wouldn't change with adjustments in the representation ratios.
David B.
> >Other facts, such as the fact that TNG's ratings were four times the
> >ratings TOS ever reached, and I'd definately say that the TOS crew is no more
> >popular than the TNG crew.
>
> Please remember that the Nielson ratings standards were different back then.
> They say that if the ratings standards they use *now* were used back then, TOS
> would've been considered a huge smash hit.
Actually, if you take the demographics into account TOS would've been considered a
hit. Nielsen wise it wouldn't be. Demographics are considered to be very important
in the tv business today.
Trekkie6O8
considered a
hit. Nielsen wise it wouldn't be. Demographics are considered to be very
important
in the tv business today.>>
Demographics, in television-speak, are calculated by Nielsen Media
Research and are simply breakdowns of the household rating everyone is familiar
with. Although shows fare slightly better in one demo than another, there would
never be a huge disparity between the household ratings and the majorty of the
demographics.
Paul J Oh
Wade Greiner wrote:
> Stan Horwitz wrote in message <75j8r4$557$1...@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>...
> >CRT22 () wrote:
> >: 1. YOU'VE GOT MAIL $6.020 OPEN
> >: 2. PRINCE OF EGYPT $4.265
> >: 3. STAR TREK $2.240 -76% $029.578 SINCE OPENING
> >: 4. BUG'S LIFE $2.100 -17% $088.455
> >: 5. ENEMY OF THE STATE $1.245 -38% $075.601
> >: 6. JACK FROST $1.145 -32% $009.741
> >: 7. WATERBOY $0.870 -36% $138.670
> >: 8. PSYCHO $0.575 -55% $017.119
> >: 9. RUGRATS $0.525 -42% $074.494
> >: 10. ELIZABETH $0.235 -36% $012.484
> >: 11. LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL $0.140 -03% $007.029
> >: 12. BABE II $0.100 -63% $014.067
> >:
> >: Worse than The Final Frontier. So much for the new crew and so much
> >: for Star Trek.
> >
> >Some people just have to complain. Have you any idea who's involved with
> >the two movies that beat ST this weekend? Tom Hanks is in You've Got Mail
> >and Disney's behind Egypt. Being beat by a Tom Hanks movie and a Disney
> >production is nothing to feel bad about. I am quite impressed that with
> >that stiff competition, Insurrection still came out third.
> >
>
> Well, I don't think the problem is so much being behind Hanks & Ryan, and
> Disney, the hard thing that I'm sure the Star Trek money watchers are
> worried about is that the income went down a rather horrid 76% from the last
> Friday intake. Of course there is always a significant decreases the
> weekend after the opening, but 76% is huge. Now they may have rebound on
> Sat. but that is, frankly, pretty unlikely. Unless a miracle happens one
> has to wonder if this film is going to make even $70 mil domestic. Not good
> considering the rising actor salaries for this series. Maybe it is time to
> bring in a Deep Space Nine movie... I have a feeling they can sign that
> cast a lot cheaper... :-)
Ummm, Prince of Egypt wasn't made by Disney. It's made by Dreamworks.
In either case, I'm just glad that Jack Frost didn't beat it out. uuugh.
Paul
--
Responding to the complaints that AOL does not control abusive
IRC users, Fichtner (AOL Rep) wrote: "Life sucks. Buy a helmet."
Alfred P12
>that matters is what the movie ends its run with. Trek movies, all of them,
>have seen major dips after the first weekend. It's simply a function of having
>that huge Trekkie audience.
This is essentially incorrect. I read a newspaper article explaining that the
studios track not only the revenues, but the day-to-day trends of ticket sales.
The studios use sophisticated mathematical models that allow them to project
total revenues quite accurately after only a few days of release. The huge
drops in Insurrection sales are very bad news for Paramount.
-Al
PhineasBg
salaries. This does NOT include the reshooting.
Here are the current tallies for Insurrection:
2ND WEEKEND ESTIMATED GROSS
$8,500,000
SAT - DEC 19 - DAILY GROSS
$3,380,000
FRI - DEC 18 - DAILY GROSS
$2,240,000 (falls to 3rd behind You've Got Mail and Prince
of Egypt)
THUR - DEC 17 - DAILY GROSS
$1,123,079
WED - DEC 16 - DAILY GROSS
$1,143,520
TUE - DEC 15 - DAILY GROSS
$1,506,863
MON - DEC 14 - DAILY GROSS
$1,511,380
OPENING WEEKEND (DEC 11-13)
$22,052,836
CURRENT CUMULATIVE FIGURE - SAT - DEC 19
$32,958,000