So we discussed the ups and downs of Into Darkness on our last Podcast, and it has been about a week since the official release and I am still having trouble with getting down my exact feelings about it. I am pretty torn, and I know that I am not the only person who feels this way. It appears that Into Darkness is on its way to be considered a financial disappointment, at least domestically, and no one really knows why.

Well here’s my plan, I am going to do two separate reviews, one from the perspective of a keep demographic movie goer, and one from a die hard trekker. That’s right, I said trekker. Fuck all that trekkie shit. So the goal is to figure out what went wrong. Why did this film only gross 80 million in its opening weekend while its predecessor gross over 20 million more in the same time period? Why is this film considered a “financial failure”. My other goal here is not to delve too deep into the story itself, but there will obviously bee some spoilers here, so reader beware…

Alrighty, the first perspective I am going to look at here is going to be from an average target demographic movie goer. This person knows what Star Trek is, is familar with Vulcans, Klingons, and maybe even the Borg. But this person is not a Star Trek fan. They like movies like Star Wars, Iron Man, and the Dark Knight series. They like scifi films, but the TV series were just a little too much for them. The enjoyed the reboot from four years ago and are excited to see the new film.

 

Did you enjoy the film? 

Yes I did. It was funny, there were a ton of action sequences, you got to see Alice Eve in here underwear, the acting was well done, that dude from the British Sherlock did a hell of a job, and I felt like I didn’t have to know much about the Star Trek universe to get into it. It was a fun summertime movie that had everything I wanted it to have in it.

Why do you think that this film is considered a “Financial Flop”?

Well, the only thing I could think of would be the timing of the films release. I mean I loved the movie, but I usually only go to one film a month. So to release it in May when there are so many other movies that I(and my target demographic) want to see was tough. I had to choose between Star Trek, Iron Man 3, Fast 6, and the Hangover Part 3. I mean it was a tough decision. The original film came out in December when nothing good was coming out, so why couldn’t they have done that again?

 

Now, lets take a look at the film from a different perspective. This person loves Star Trek. He was been a supporter of the series since he was a kid, whenever that may have been. He has seen all the TV series (Except Voyager, no one should have to stomach that piece of shit), and all the movies. He thought what J.J. Abrahms did with the original reboot was a work of genius. It was original, yet familiar. It connected all the past Trek lore, but still remained independent. It was well cast, and well written. This person loves Star Trek.

 

Did you enjoy the film?

I did, for the most part. It was kind of disappointing that the writers decided to recycle a lot of the same stuff from Wrath of Khan, instead of creative a sequel that stood on its own two feet like the first film did. Cumberpath wasn’t bad or anything, it just kind of felt like a cop out. The actors all did a good job, and it looked amazing, but yeah, the main issue was the story.

Why do you think that this film is considered a “Financial Flop”?

Well, honestly I had plans to see it the minute it was announced, because I love Star Trek. So I’m not sure how to answer that question. If I had to guess, I would say that the way the marketing of the film tried so hard to say that the villain was not Khan may have been an issue. I mean, I get the whole surprise reveal and all of that, but the guys who made this movie are smart enough to know that the internet would ruin that surprise. People don’t like to be lied to and the only thing I could think of that hurt this films numbers would have to be misleading advertising.

😉

 

How do we here at Nerdwest feel about the film. Somewhere in between these two guys. They both make decent points about a cramped May release schedule and some misleading advertising, but its hard to explain such a drastic domestic drop off. I mean that 20 million doesn’t even take into account the extra income that was brought in due to Into Darkness being available in both IMAX and 3D, two things it’s predecessor did not have the luxury of having. There are many questions, but in the end Star Trek Into Darkness is a good film. Not perfect, but good, so go check it out, oh and by the way, feel free to skip the Hangover 3, not worth the money.

Leave a Reply