WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
Trailer for George Clooney's "Hail, Caesar," Directed by Coen Brothers
Oct 13th, 2015
"The Expendables 4" is Actually Happening
Oct 13th, 2015
Official "X-Men: Apocalypse" Plot Synopsis Revealed
Oct 13th, 2015
"Furious 8" and "xXx 3" Announce Directors
Oct 13th, 2015
First Trailer for "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies"
Oct 13th, 2015
Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Oct 9th, 2015
"Ant-Man" Gets a Sequel, Marvel's Phase Three Release Dates Announced
Oct 9th, 2015
Pixar's "Toy Story 4," "Cars 3" and "The Incredibles 2" Get New Release Dates
Oct 9th, 2015
First Look at Disney's New Princess "Moana"
Oct 9th, 2015
Steve McQueen's "Papillon" is Getting a Remake
Oct 9th, 2015
Four Directors Considered for "Fast and Furious 8"
Oct 7th, 2015
"The Flash" Movie Hires Director
Oct 7th, 2015
Restricted Trailer for "Triple Nine," with Casey Affleck and Woody Harrelson
Oct 7th, 2015
Nicolas Cage Turned Down Lead Role in "Lord of the Rings"
Oct 5th, 2015
First Look at Matthew McConaughey in "Gold"
Oct 5th, 2015
"Thor 3" Found Its Director
Oct 5th, 2015
"Power Rangers" Reboot is Testing These Eight Actors
Oct 5th, 2015
James McAvoy in Talks for M. Night Shyamalan's New Supernatural Thriller
Oct 5th, 2015
Final Trailer for "Spectre" James Bond Film
Oct 3rd, 2015
Trailer for Kurt Russell's "Bone Tomahawk" Western
Oct 3rd, 2015
Reboot of "MacGyver" TV Series in the Works with James Wan
Oct 3rd, 2015
Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes
Oct 2nd, 2015
Final Poster for "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2"
Oct 2nd, 2015
Trailer for "The Forest" Supernatural Thriller
Oct 2nd, 2015
New Trailer for Leonardo DiCaprio's "The Revenant" Thriller
Oct 1st, 2015
First Look: Andrew Garfield in Mel Gibson's "Hacksaw Ridge"
Oct 1st, 2015
Matthew Vaughn to Direct "I Am Pilgrim" Thriller
Oct 1st, 2015
Vin Diesel Says "Furious 8" is Part of Last Trilogy
Sep 29th, 2015
Danny Boyle to Shoot "Trainspotting" Sequel Next Summer
Sep 29th, 2015
Matt Damon Would Play Daredevil if Christopher Nolan Directed
Sep 27th, 2015
Ridley Scott Says "Prometheus 2" Will Have Connections to Ripley
Sep 27th, 2015
Sigourney Weaver Joins "Ghostbusters" Reboot
Sep 27th, 2015
Matt Damon Discusses "Bourne" Plot Details
Sep 27th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"Star Trek Into Darkness" Slightly Underperforms, But Already Grossed $164 Million

Posted: May 19th, 2013 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"Star Trek Into Darkness" Slightly Underperforms, But Already Grossed $164 MillionSubmit Comment
"Star Trek Into Darkness" took first place at the domestic box office with a four-day opening of $84 million, short of the $100 million that Paramount Pictures predicted. Overseas, the movie grossed another $80 million, for a worldwide total of $164 million.

JJ Abrams' first "Star Trek" movie opened to $79.2 million back in 2009. While the sequel will likely earn the same amount as the first film domestically ($258 million), Paramount is expecting to at least double the international result of first movie ($127 million).

In other words, the studio expects "Star Trek Into Darkness" to end up with a worldwide total of $500 million theatrically. The film cost $190 million to make and has a RottenTomatoes fresh rating of 87%.

Meanwhile, "Iron Man 3" broke the $1 billion mark and is currently the ninth highest-grossing film of all-time.

Click here to read our "Star Trek Into Darkness."

Check out the rest of the box office results

Source: THR

Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 35 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
minkowski writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:49:45 PM

Damn. And here I was hoping for a flop, not that that would stop Paramount from making more soulless Star Trek movies.
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:51:55 PM

Benedict c*mberbatch is Khan.
Chris_G writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:53:27 PM

Not shocked at all...the reviews an 'A' cinemascore from audiences speak for themselves. It'll be interesting to see how it plays in the following weeks. Internationally it seems like it's going to do quite a bit better than the first, but I'm curious if the North American performance will pull ahead or lag behind the first film.
pornfly writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:57:33 PM

Everytime talk show that the cast and JJ go on,
all they can talk about how good it looks
pornfly writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:57:56 PM

Deaft0ne writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 10:59:23 PM


Everyone should keep posting pics until alex adds a f*cking edit button. Quid pro quo.
GreenLensman writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:17:04 PM

that would be diabolically splendid
GreenLensman writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:30:43 PM

One thing I found cheap about Into Darkness was the whole part where Bones was doing testing on a furry little "tribble". If I'm not mistaken, the tribbles were encountered DURING their 5 year mission in space, not before it. Also the whole scene at the end was just reversed, where spock was originally locked in a room saving the ship, anyways, it's a alternate timeline, obviously, so who gives a sh*t.
minkowski writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:49:49 PM

He's not going to give you, us an edit button. Fact is, Alex "owns" about nine online properties, all of which aren't exactly getting buyout offers from Google. Hell, this website's only worth about fifteen grand. I have underwear worth that much. So if you think Alex is gong to sink time and money into re-doing the code here to give us jokers an edit button, you're higher than you look.
minkowski writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:50:42 PM

"Benedict c*mberbatch is Khan."

He wishes.
telur writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:51:11 PM

Jason Statham kill Han in the ending of Fast Furious 6 (took a scene from Fast Furious 3)

and Gina is a Luke Evans team, he betrayal Dwayne Johnson

you're f*cking genius Justin Lin

Read more: http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=28426#ixzz2TnkT1e7B
Deaft0ne writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:54:34 PM

Lol mink, but adding an edit button is so rudimentary that I wonder if the template for this site had one and alex removed it.

Even blogspot has an edit function for comments and it's way older than wp.
minkowski writes:
on May 19th, 2013 at 11:54:49 PM

^^^Thanks but I've already seen it.
Fightclub1 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 12:21:00 AM

I really enjoyed Star Trek a lot. Good summer blockbuster feel
minkowski writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 12:23:46 AM

I'm trying to think of a scene in Into Darkness that I greatly enjoyed. Can't. Not really. The space battle and subsequent crash of the Federation warship was cool in a Michael Bay sort of way, but not enough attention was given upfront to the other ship, and I feel all the damage the Enterprise sustained, along with the utter trashing of San Francisco, was gratuitous and pointless.

Seems nowadays you have to have a blow-em-scene. Seems obligatory. Like in GI Joe 2, wherein they destroyed London. Or the tank-highway scene in Fast and Furious 6.

It's what I call the Bayification of cinema, with the addition of what I call Snyderification.

Champ1432 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 12:29:17 AM

Just got back from seeing it, I actually thought it was pretty good. Going into it, I had reservations about seeing Khan done again by someone else (not that I knew that was the case, but there were the rumors), but I thought they did a pretty good job. Not great perhaps, but pretty good.

I like all the little mentions they put in there to tie back to the some of the older series, the Tribble, Section 31, mentioning Harry Mudd.

Yeah, you can say it was just a cheap remake of Star Trek II, and I suppose in some ways it was. But they also did a good job of exploring or continuing to explore some of the themes from the original series and movies, such as Spock's conflict between his Vulcan and human sides, the friendship between Kirk and Spock, Kirk's attitude which can be a help and a hindrance.

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good movie. I say that acknowledging that these new movies are not better than the original movies (for the most part...... #5..... yikes), but I don't really expect them to be, either. They might not capture the spirit of the originals entirely, but I think they do have a spirit of their own, and I think they're doing a pretty good job. It was also nice to see more of the Trek "universe", getting glimpses of Starfleet HQ, etc.

I think both Pine and Quinto did pretty well, c*mberbatch did well in a role that really can't be duplicated.

All in all, I really enjoyed it. I'm sure there are a lot of naysayers about it out there, but I'm already looking forward to the next one. Perhaps that one will get a little closer to the original spirit, since they started the 5 year mission now.
boogiel writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 1:02:55 AM

I swear... just because the movie doesn't shatter every record known to man doesn't make it a failure. On the other hand, we get sequels to Smurfs, Fast and Furious, and Hangover.
vincere01 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 1:34:40 AM

yes in the prime timeline it happens during the 5 year mission. As does meeting kahn. But as the first movie set up, things wont play out the same. There will be some things the same, some changed and some just wont happen.

also there was a very quick reference to "the mudd incident" that happened shortly before the events of into darkness. The shuttle they use to enter klingon space isnharry mudds ship that they impounded. So.....thats the answer to why tribbles were there.
vincere01 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 1:34:41 AM

yes in the prime timeline it happens during the 5 year mission. As does meeting kahn. But as the first movie set up, things wont play out the same. There will be some things the same, some changed and some just wont happen.

also there was a very quick reference to "the mudd incident" that happened shortly before the events of into darkness. The shuttle they use to enter klingon space isnharry mudds ship that they impounded. So.....thats the answer to why tribbles were there.
pornfly writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 2:54:53 AM

I can wait to see this but lemme guess,
Shot beautifully
Top notch green screen
Enough lens flare to ignite some Fourth of July snakes
Crappy plot
With some throwback references tossed in for good measure
Topped off with a handful of snarky personality remarks
Kurskij writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 2:54:56 AM


Why did you do that?..
minkowski writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 3:04:50 AM

Telur forgot the largest spoiler of them all....the gay love scene with Johnson and Deisel.
Džeko writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 3:57:39 AM

Watched it last night:
1)Visually very impressive
2)Recycled story
3)Not nearly enough screen time for c*mberbatch
4)Da fuq is up with the new Klingons look!?They wear masks now!?!?REALLY?!?They have low self-esteem so they are hiding their ugly faces?!

Overall 7/10.

The_Architect writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 4:06:20 AM

it will never be a huge box office - it's star trek ! most women don't give a sh*t about sci-fi or klingons.
Damon242 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 5:20:38 AM

I really don't see how it's a cheap knock off of Star Trek II. Only the controversial scene in the third act actually directly copies Star Trek II.

The complaints are odd. You already know that this new generation of Star Trek films isn't directed at old Trek fans, that is has been reinvented (ala Battlestar Galactica) to suit a modern day audience (thankfully dispensing of the archetypal and blandly-acted characters, the cheesy dialogue, and heavy-handed themes, to name a few things, that nostalgic fans all too often turn a blind eye to). And you already know that it doesn't follow canon, and for very specific reasons outlined in the narrative. So then, why do you continue to

a) complain that it's not the same as it used to be
b) complain that it doesn't make sense in relation to what has come before
c) complain that it lacks the relevance as the original series did, even though that was broadcast in the 1960's and this is the 21st century
d) forget that the original incarnation of the series was cancelled three seasons in due to poor audience numbers and that the series didn't really achieve popularity until The Next Generation

It's like listening to how all the old fans hated the Battlestar Galactica reinvention for all of the same reasons, some even more juvenile.

And how can you be surprised that the writers chose to feature this particular villain? It would be like complaining that a rebooted Batman franchise re-used the Joker, given that it's been done before.

Hey, wait a minute. Silly me, that's exactly what happened when The Dark Knight was released.

Stop complaining about the film's direction and that of the new franchise for such silly reasons. Remember that it's not meant for you, and so if you don't like the new direction, use some commonsense and don't see its sequel just so you can bitch some more.

Sad to see so many negative reviews that are not objective, that criticize the film in comparison to previous Star Trek films rather than as a film on its own.

Tanman32123 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 5:37:52 AM

15 grand! Not to shabby Alex.. Not..

And guys I know NOTHING about Star Trek, Disnt watch the show(s), Any of the movies OR The last one. But just out of curiosity, If someone asks me to go watch this with them, Would It even make sense? I know like.. A couple character names, Thats literally it lol Would I even understand the plot?

Not saying I'm going to see it tomorrow or anything, But I have ran out of movies to watch in theaters.. That's why I resorted to 'Room 237' Yesterday :P
Tanman32123 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 5:46:44 AM

Guys what if Damon242 is REALLY Damon lidelof! Maybe he's made an account on WP just to back up his LOST buddy JJ Abrams !

What if...

God this crack cocain is good..
pornfly writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 5:50:20 AM

as a canadian you owe it to yourself to watch the original movie.
Then watch the Space Seed episode from the series.
Then enjoy Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock

You could then proceed to watch the rest of the original movies OR just watch the 2009 re-boot
and its sequel
pornfly writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 5:57:34 AM


The first canadian badass?
SACdaddy writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 9:29:35 AM

@Damon: By their own nature no sequels, remakes, or reboots can really operate in the vacuum you seem to want them to. They are all purposely a part of a much bigger thing that banks on a certain history and familiarity with the audience. If they truly don't want to be compared to their predecessors they should stop using their titles, plots, and content. This new Star Trek for example deliberately keep reminding the audience of the prior franchises by shoehorning in little (and very big) cookies every 5 minutes into its stories. They tried to separate themselves with this alternate timeline stuff but unfortunately they still bank heavily on material established in prior films. It's kind of lazy imo being an easy way to get butts in the seat and play on people's nostalgia instead of providing something new for the audience. The first JJ ST film was tons more creative, using familiar characters but focusing on a younger part of their lives that is very unfamiliar to the audience (kind of like Craig's Bond). Hopefully the next film will ditch the old connections and truly forge its own path as the five year mission begins.

If you truly want to see a sequel/reboot that honestly should be considered in a vacuum, watch DREDD. It has zero to do with its predecessor. It never references it or throws in any cookies from it for cheap laughs and emotional connections. In fact it basically spits in the face of the prior film by simply being everything Sly's film was not, a highly stylistic and unforgiving sci fi action movie with a character and content that is very true to the source material. But even with all this going for it, its still almost impossible not to at least compare it to the original film.
SACdaddy writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 9:37:30 AM

Sorry for the rant. I've been having mixed feeling about Star Trek all weekend. Its not a bad movie by a long shot, but it still doesn't sit well with me. It's just way to lazy imo.
python6 writes:
on May 20th, 2013 at 1:02:31 PM

AFTER finding out how the villain was everything else was predicable to me.
Tanman32123 writes:
on May 21st, 2013 at 1:57:19 AM

Thanks porn lol
cruzcontrol39 writes:
on May 21st, 2013 at 2:36:38 AM

Too many plot holes... Not surprising since that f*cker Lindelof co-wrote it...
python6 writes:
on May 21st, 2013 at 6:51:50 AM

Could this New Star Trek be the Mirror,Mirror universe.Hints the title Into Darkness. The beginning of what to come.The angry Kirk who lost his father the angry Mr. Spock who lost his planet.Star Fleet building super ship of mass destruction.

General Zod to Have Flippers Instead of Hands in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice"

Two Ben Affleck Movies Delayed, "Batman" Reboot Happening Earlier?

Director Josh Trank Blames Studio for Terrible "Fantastic Four" Reviews

James Wan Joins "Mortal Kombat" Reboot

Hugh Jackman Hints at Sabertooth and Berserker Rage in "Wolverine 3"

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes

"Transformers 5" Plot Details Revealed

Universal Pictures Already Broke the Record for Highest-Grossing Year

Jennifer Lawrence and Amy Schumer Working on New Comedy
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved