Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Weekend B.O. May 17-19 (What's A Disappointment?)

Box Office
by Sergio
May 19, 2013 1:58 PM
17 Comments
  • |
Star Trek

Only in the film business can a movie make $84 million over the weekend and still be considered a disappointment. But that’s what some people are saying about Star Trek: Into Darkness.

Since it opened Weds night, the film has grossed that amount, which is about equal to what the previous Star Trek reboot made, during its first weekend in 2009, adjusted for today dollars. There were originally predictions of a $100 million weekend, but it fell short. Still $84 million is definitely nothing to sneeze at.

Iron Man 3 has already passed the $1 billion mark worldwide which explains why Robert Downey is reportedly asking for the moon from Marvel Productions and Disney, to reprise the role again.

Meanwhile 42 keeps chugging along, still in the top ten, approaching $90 million. The film could just edge out $95 million by the time it drops out of the top ten.

1) Star Trek Into Darkness Par. $70,555,000Total: $84,091,000 
2) Iron Man 3 BV $35,182,000  Total: $337,073,000 
3) The Great Gatsby WB $23,415,000 Total: $90,159,000
4) Pain and Gain Par. $3,100,000 Total: $46,574,000 
5) The Croods Fox $2,750,000 Total: $176,750,000 
6) 42 WB $2,730,000 Total: $88,735,000 
7) Oblivion Uni. $2,222,000 Total: $85,500,000 
8) Mud RAtt. $2,160,000 Total: $11,588,000 
9) Tyler Perry Presents Peeples LGF $2,150,000 Total: $7,858,000 
10) The Big Wedding LGF $1,100,000 Total: $20,198,000 
Box Office
  • |
Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

17 Comments

  • Geneva Girl | May 21, 2013 4:26 AMReply

    Arrggghh!! (How do you spell a scream?) STID has only opened in the German-speaking part of Switzerland and won't open in the French-speaking part until mid-June! Heck, it'll be on DVD by then. I'm a die-hard Trekker and this is one movie that I'll pay $22 for 3D and pay for a babysitter, if I could only see it.

  • ALM | May 21, 2013 9:55 AM

    3D movies are $22 where you live? O_____O

  • saadiyah | May 20, 2013 9:53 AMReply

    I saw it on Friday and LOVED IT! It took my mind of the abomination that was the Scandal Finale!

    Yes it wasn't as good as the first, but I thoroughly enjoyed it.

  • sosgemini | May 20, 2013 2:10 AMReply

    Why the sympathetic take on STID's results? We have a film that cost more than the original yet grossed similar results despite inflation *and* higher ticket prices for IMAX and 3D? It appears that JJ's bastardization of Star Trek is cooked. I wonder what's next for this series. Maybe a take that's more reliable to the spirit of its original content? Or at least something that's a lil bit longer lasting to enjoy than a microwaved Thanksgiving dinner? (Great upon initial taste but hard to swallow afterwards...)

  • Josh | May 20, 2013 8:35 AM

    It seems that in the next one they will finally to to deep space and stay there! I also hope the next villian is not a guy with a grudge against starfleet and a suped up ship, Abrams has done that twice. The movie IS sill a fun ride though.

  • JEFTCG | May 20, 2013 1:31 AMReply

    Well, after reading the spoiler-heavy comments below, I can now say it's a good thing I'm not going to see the Star Trek movie. (that was sarcasm.) Thanks a lot, a-holes. (that was not.)

  • AccidentalVisitor | May 19, 2013 11:54 PMReply

    The boxoffice gurus had to keep downgrading the box office expectations all weekend long. It was pretty sad. The film made 70 million from Friday thru Sunday which should be pretty impressive in previous eras. But we are in the era of the Billion dollar blockbusters, an era where films are released in other nations before they open in the USA. These are different times. This movie cost supposedly $190 million to make (why?) and that does not include all the money for promotions. Studios want results. They expect sequels to open stronger than the first films (the Drak Knight made far more its first weekend than Batman Begins had). Paramount's eggs were all in this basket, this is their lone franchise outside of Transformers. Experts now figure the film will not make it to $300 million domestically and may not even surpass the domestic gross of the previous film from four years ago. Thus, it is considered a disappointment.

  • sergio | May 20, 2013 9:58 AM

    Star Trek movies have always had a shaky b.o. history. Some have done a lot better than others. And Nemesis was an outright failure. But that last 2009 Trek film was the biggest grossing Trek film ever However, their audience is basically made up of hard core fans (WAAAY too many insider references to other Trek movies and TV shows that go right over the audience's heads...like mine) And only a few films have transcended that to gain a wider audience. This new one isn't going to top $250 million means means like all films it's the foreign box office that's going to determine if it's a success or not

    Yet, still with merchandising who knows how many billions Paramount has made from the Trek tentpole which is why it's still worth it to them to keep them going

  • ALM | May 19, 2013 6:08 PMReply

    "Into Darkness" was not as good as the reboot from a couple of years ago, just like "Iron Man 2" was not nearly as good as the first "Iron Man" with RDJ.

    The good news for the "Star Trek" franchise is that "Iron Man 3" brought the quality level back up, so hopefully the next "Star Trek" movie will be better than this one was.

    SPOILERS AHEAD****

    A big gripe that I and a family member of mine had were that there were parts of "Into Darkness" that were not explained well and were left hanging, almost as if the filmmakers did not watch the final product and forgot to tie up certain loose ends.

    One example of this was after the little girl was injected with Khan's blood. The audience is left to assume that she is one of the people cryogenically frozen in the torpedos.

    Another example is the fact that the ring Khan gave the girl's father exploded when placed in water, but the admiral had the same ring on and that ring had absolutely no significance.

    A third example was the random addition of the admiral's daughter to the Enterprise. I kept thinking that Khan's blood somehow transformed the little girl that I mentioned in example one to the admiral's daughter, but that was not the case. The admiral's daughter was just a very RANDOM character, and certain parts of the movie felt as if they were made by amateur filmmakers.

  • Akimbo | May 20, 2013 9:50 PM

    I really wasn't trying to throw shade so sorry if it came off that way. I just thought the gripes you had weren't the fault of the film makers. I admit that I do know some Star Trek trivia (the classic "Khan!" scream, Vulcan grip, "red shirts" meaning, basic original characters) but I've never seen an episode of the show in my life. Didn't know who Carol Marcus was/is at all, I just never for one second thought that she was the sick little girl from the beginning.

  • ALM | May 20, 2013 7:38 PM

    Akimbo, the shade that you threw was unnecessary.

    The points that I stated were weak points in the movie in my opinion.

    Everyone is not a Trek expert.

  • Akimbo | May 20, 2013 6:20 PM

    I can't blame the film makers for any of the confusion you mentioned.

    -----------SPOILERS----------

    1. It was pretty clear Khan's blood had regenerative powers. Why would the father sacrifice his life just to have his child enslaved/abducted by Khan? He wanted his child to live happily and probably with her mom. They reiterated that Khan's blood had healing powers when Bones managed to resurrect a dead tribble with it. That entire "magic blood" thread was just so they could bring back Kirk at the end.

    2. The ring is clearly something that members of the federation (or whatever it's called) wear. It's a lot less suspicious if the father goes into work wearing the bomb on his finger, rather than carrying a suspicious briefcase in.

    3. Sorry if you thought the sneaky blonde was somehow the half-black little girl from before. There was no evidence to support such an explanation, she was just a new, yes suspicious, character. There's no way they'd have a little girl in disguise undressed in front of and having sexual tension with grown men.

    @Josh I'm guessing Carol Marcus will be back for the next film and she'll hook up with Kirk then. Glad they didn't go there this time; I was dreading it.

  • AccidentalVisitor | May 19, 2013 11:47 PM

    Carol Marcus is the name of the admiral's daughter and she played a big role in previous Trek films of the Shatner-Nimoy era. She created the Genesis-something-something device and was the mother of Kirk's son. Apparently she had less importance in this new film.

  • Josh | May 19, 2013 10:01 PM

    The girl survived, that was part of the deal with Harrison/Khan. She's not part of his crew. The ring is a Starfleet academy ring that Khan put an explosive charge in. Carol Marcus was in it basically to see what futuristic ladies underwear looks like. A major gripe is that Marcus beamed her to the Vengence despite the Enterprises shields being up. Also not a fan of the Enerprise flying within earth's orbit, that would take a crazy amount of vertical thrust.

  • Josh | May 19, 2013 5:53 PMReply

    I feel they wet the bed in the third act. Khan was at his most interesting when he was shifting between villian and anti-villian. After he beams his people aboard he just becomes a one dimensional psycho. Hated how it ended with a footchase. Can these guys please go into space and stay there!?

  • Akimbo | May 20, 2013 6:23 PM

    I didn't understand why he was even running away. I assumed he was running towards something, but didn't turn out like that. You are physically superior: just kill the person bothering you and carry on with your day!

  • Adam Scott Thompson | May 19, 2013 4:23 PMReply

    I went to see it with my die-hard Trekkie mother. We both enjoyed it but felt that it just towed the line from the first film and didn't take enough risks.

    But... we're both predicting that the next installment will be the "Iron Man 3" of the new franchise if the war with the Klingons that was foreshadowed in this film comes to pass.

Follow Shadow and Act

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • Muted, Black & White First Trailer for ...
  • Exclusive - Watch 1st Trailer for Nefertite ...
  • Review: Amma Asante's Brave 'Belle' ...
  • Omar Sy Takes a Dramatic-Romantic Turn ...
  • 'Life After Death' (Conflicting Portrait ...
  • 'Funk, God, Jazz, and Medicine: Black ...
  • Academy President Cheryl Boone Isaacs ...
  • Veronica and Efren Go on a Trip in Divisive ...
  • AAFCA Announces 2015 Special Achievement ...
  • Thankfully, 'The Equalizer' Gets an ...