Paramount's 'Star Trek' Wins the Award No Film Wanted
Did you help make this happen?
The Hollywood Reporter brings word via data obtained by TorrentFreak that Paramount's Star Trek was the most pirated film of 2009. The film went on to make $385 million at the worldwide box-office and is currently the #6 domestic earner for 2009 with Avatar poised to take it over by next Friday. So some may say pirating didn't really effect it that much. However, there's a curious statistic I noticed earlier this year that may paint a different picture.
Terminator Salvation made $125 million domestically, $132 million less than Star Trek. However, if you compare their international numbers things quickly even out. Worldwide, Star Trek made $385 million while Terminator Salvation cut the domestic gap dramatically by pulling in $246 million for a total of $372 million worldwide. Even more curious is the fact Terminator Salvation doesn't even show up on TorrentFreak's numbers.
The top ten is as follows. (All numbers are estimates)
- Star Trek – 10.9m downloads ($385.4m worldwide box-office)
- Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen – 10.6m downloads ($834.9m worldwide box-office)
- RocknRolla – 9.4m downloads ($25.7m worldwide box-office)
- The Hangover – 9.1m downloads ($459.4m worldwide box-office)
- Twilight – 8.7m downloads ($384.9m worldwide box-office)
- District 9 – 8.2m downloads ($204.5m worldwide box-office)
- Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince – 7.9m downloads ($929.3m worldwide box-office)
- State of Play – 7.44m downloads ($87.7m worldwide box-office)
- X-Men Origins: Wolverine – 7.2m downloads ($373.0m worldwide box-office)
- Knowing – 6.9m downloads ($183.2m worldwide box-office)
I can only wonder how these numbers may have affected the foreign and/or box-office return for these films, but I have to assume it played some role.
The Hollywood Reporter's Eriq Gardner thinks the reason for piracy is due to the problematic release schedule:
If you don't want your stuff pirated, think of the CONSUMER, not your pocketbook. Not everyone is going to see this in theaters, NOT everyone lives in the U.S. and NOT everyone owns a Blu Ray Player.
Of course, they're going to try to pad your pocketbook, but the way releases are done now is horrific. Put the movie out on DVD/BR the same day it's in theaters, and release EVERYWHERE universally, not staggered out like most companies do.
 Loading ... |
I can't tell you how much I hate the idea of day-and-date theatrical and home video releases. Gardner says, "What do I know though, I'm just a consumer that refuses to pay massive $$$ to see movies in the theater multiple times just because the prod. company doesn't want to adhere to some pretty basic consumer principles." He may have a point, but his solution cheapens the entire process. Movies would no longer be special, they would simply be a product. I obviously have something of a glorified view of movies and believe there's anything better than watching a great movie for the first time on the big screen, and recommending others do the same in hopes of enjoying the experience as much as I did.
If movies were released simultaneously at home and in theaters the theatrical market would dry up completely. Humans like things easy and cheap. It would obviously be easier and cheaper to rent/buy a movie rather than pack up the friends and family and head to the theater, but if anyone thinks they get the same experience at home as they did in the theater is lying to themselves. Just my two cents.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 24 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
Gardener's point about staggered release dates is valid.
I'd just add that if someone has no intention of paying for a film, I'd rather they download or buy an illegal copy than sneak into a theatre. At least when they stay at home it doesn't interfere with the theatrical experience I'm paying for.
And just because someone pirated a movie doesn't mean they would have purchased a ticket or disc if the pirated version was not available. I saw Wolverine because a friend purchased it. I sat through it only because I didn't have to pay for it, in no way does the fact I saw it for free mean that Fox lost out on a sale. Simply, one download doesn't necessarily equal one less ticket sale.
RockNRolla? really?
I agree that it's hard to replace the theater experience. However if a family is given a choice of spending 20-40 bucks (going with more than 1 person to the theater) or 15-25 buying that same movie, I say what's the harm? we cant impose that someone 'should' see movies in the theater.
I have heard this argument before, the idea of releasing the movie simultaneously on DVD and in the theatre. I know they did that for Steven Soderburgh's Indie film Bubble.
And I know that Comcast On Demand offers movies that are in theatres that are Indie fims or art house films or films produced through IFC. Which I do not have an issue with because those films aren't released as wide as main stream films and it helps get them to other markets that might miss out.
But as far as wider released movies or main stream movies go, I think it would be wrong to release the DVD the same day it's released in theatres… Brad you are right and I have maintained this same opinion, that movies need to be seen in theatres to be truly appreciated… sure you can pick and choose which ones you go see in theatres or wait till they come out on DVD, but there is something about sitting in the dark with a bunch of like minded strangers watching a movie unfold on a 40 foot screen… i don't care how well your home entertainment system is, because unless you have the money to build a full size movie theatre, it is not the same. And yes, you can say that movie prices today are to high, well thats the fault of movie budgets being so high these days. Theatre companies don't make that much money from the box office sales… thats why concessions are so high. I deal with those facts because I like seeing films in a theatre. I think the biggest downfall in seeing movies in the theatre and people having the mind set that they have awesome home theatres systems, is people start talking during a movie or answering their cell phone, because they get things confused and are just assholes. But I'll always like going to see movies in a theatre… but hey maybe thats jus me.
As far as pirating goes… it's a crappy trend and as technology gets better and better, it'll continue to be a problem… it sucks, but that's the truth. Unfortunately.
@cineJAB: Yeah that's a weird comment…
I think if someone downloads a movie they probably loved it so much in theatres the first time around they want to see it again before the dvd release, when they will probably rent/buy it
or…
They never had any intention of shelling out money for the release anyway, and if the movie is good, it will give it more exposure, which may or may not turn into $$.
Either way the studio still has every incentive to make good movies.
I love downloading from Internet coz i m frm India and they release only few hollywood movies this year..so TOrrent helped me to see all those movies that are gonna be competing for awards in 2010….long live Torrents….
Hm well people pirated RockNRolla because they must've imagined it'd be too terrible to sit through if they paid $1 to see in the theatre.
What studios need to do is stop releasing movies in 6-12 month spans accross the world. When they've been available this long they will pirated more, period. A movie needs to open up everywhere at the same time.
Plus people pirating need to be arrested or at least recieve heavy fines. You can get a movie that is the real thing that was out for about a month in perfect condition for under $10. Don't be a cheapass.
Oh, and anyone who picks up their cell phone or talks during a movie at the theatre should be either be told to stop or kicked out by an employee. Then maybe more people would show at the theatre.
@Seiko:
When I mentioned getting a movie for $10, I meant off the web.
i agree with abhishek..im from Pakistan and we only get a handful of Hollywood releases each year..this year we've had Wolverine,Star Trek,Transformers,2012,New Moon and Avatar..so my only option of seeing Hollywood films is by downloading from the internet..what other choice do i have ?
As a pirate myself, I did not illegally download "Star Trek". So don't look at me.
BTW, I thought the award that no film wanted was the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Picture.
If I was a film, I would prefer the most pirated award. That shows that many people love me but don't love me enough to give me money. Getting the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Picture shows that no one can possibly love me.
Impossible, 2012 is the most pirated film ever!
I do think that releasing the same film everywhere in the world at the same time will definately help matters. I live in the UK and although the big ones usually come out on the same day, it is the smaller films like Informant, Up in the air and The Road which we have to wait a good three months for.
I don't think that releasing a dvd at the same time will help at all, infact i think it will make piracy more of an issue as it will then mean that a good quality version will be available online as soon as the film hits cinemas instead of the crappy camera ones.
I have both seen Star Trek in cinema and later, downloaded a 720p copy. What does it make me? Supporter or a pirate?
It's the way things are. Companies may do their best to prevent piracy, but I don't think they ever will. Unless they manage to pass a law that makes internet illegal… But even if that absurdity happens, pirates will find a way to keep doing their 'job'.
The problem is not with the movies or the way they're released. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people getting a pirate version of Avatar, can you believe how absolutely awful that movie must look as a booleg? But that's how some people are. Can you change them? No. Do you have to? No!
I think movie studios (and music or videogame companies) will have to learn to live with this bad situation. It can't be changed. Some people like to download illegal copies. And they will keep doing it as long as its possible.
This makes you wonder how long it will take for Avatar to be the most pirated movie of all time.
BTW-i'm not a pirate and have never pirated a movie in my life
Hasn't Star Trek always played weaker overseas? Pirating, so far, seems only to be hurting DVD sales. I think that's the rationale for Bob Eiger et. al. wanting simultaneous theater/DVD releases. The theory is that the movie going experience is special enough to continue to draw people in, if only to get out of the house. They should test market this idea in a small market, because, even though it makes a certain amount of sense, it's a scary prospect.
It's pathetic the way people try to justify what is in fact stealing. Theft. You know, that thing your parents told you was wrong when you were a kid? It's still wrong now.
People try and put it back on the film industry, and refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. "Horrific" release schedule or not, that's the way it's done. I don't like the exhorbitant cost of buying a vehicle, but I'm not going to go out and steal one. People who think there's a difference between the two are fooling themselves.
@Disgusted:
That's the whole point.
It's not the market that should change. It's not the movie producers (and directors) that should make better *movie going experiences*.
It's the audience that should stop the illegal downloads.
I'm not judging anyone. I live in a third world country, I'm not poor, but I know how 10-20 bucks can make a diference for someone's budget, specially if that someone's salary is $200. So I understand that some people 'need' to use piracy as their only way to see movies, because cinemas are expensive and some people just can't afford it. At all.
But the thing is, it's at the audiences hands anyway. If they want, or not, to pay to watch that movie. There's nothing the companies, the filmmakers or specialists and governments can do to change that. If people want to download, they'll keep downloading. Regardless of it being wrong or not.
My first reaction was that thank God something like The Hurt Locker isn't in that list. I liked Star Trek and I wish it wasn't there, but I could care less for the rest. Am I a bad person for saying that?
Yes, I do steal. Most of it are people's decade lists. At one point I downloaded Hunger before it came out here (I eventually got free passes for it when it came out), but other than that I barely downloaded new releases. But most of the time the theatre's the only place I can see movies now because I'll be too distracted/tired at home. Besides my provider gives me 60 gigs of uploads and downloads so I guess that's their way of curbing my piracy.
And as a single guy in his 20's living with his parents in the city, movies in the theatre are cheaper. They're at the most 18 dollars for a VIP room, 5 dollars at a rep theatre. In contrast, DVDs are 37 bucks. Fuck DVDs.
@Disgusted: Largest ever domestic box office return was this past weekend. If ticket sales are down then prices have risen beyond the classical economic equilibrium that our free market society is based on.
A car is a tangible item. If you stole a car there would be one less car on the lot. One less car that could be sold. You are diminishing the supply.
Movies are intangible. Downloading a movie has no affect on supply. Other people can still pay to see that movie regardless of how many people download it. Your logic of theft -and the industry's- is based on the assumption that piracy is a substitute for purchasing a ticket; each download equals one lost sale.
That logic is flawed. Perfect examples are Abdul Moeed and Abhishek-The Oscar Maniac who are unable to purchase tickets. Their piracy does not equal any loss in ticket sales.
As Ted mentioned, piracy can allow for more exposure. Let's say Abdul downloads a movie and likes it, then comes on ROS and says how good it is. I read the review and decide that I will go to the theatre and pay money to see said movie. In that scenario, which is very similar to Brad writing reviews after seeing a critic screening, the piracy actually led to an increase in ticket sales.
The issue is much larger and complex than simple "theft".
I'm from Canada. I lived over three hours from the nearest theatre where I would have to pay over fourteen dollars a seat to sit in a theatre.
I downloaded Star Trek and then went on to buy a copy on DVD and then on BlueRay because it was amazing. If it were a crap movie I would not have paid for it. I think of it as motivation for Hollywood to stop making rubbish and earn all that money we normal people shell out for their product.
Also, Indy movies RARELY get theatre time even in the cities near here… If they want their films watched at all then you'd think they would embrace the online media sharing that has been developed. Some amazing but still 'small' films are shared and young film makers loved because of illegal downloading.
I don't download, but I did stream The Hangover and some other movies (mostly indies that weren't playing in my area) this year.
What the data shows is that there is a modest, positive correlation (.28) between illegal downloads and the box office. An OLS regression of downloads on box office shows that for each additional million in downloads, the box office rises by $61 million. In short, this data shows that the more downloads, the greater the box office, or the greater the box office, the more downloads. In essence, both are measures for the popularity of the movie, in general. Movies that fewer people want to see at the theater will be movies that fewer people will try to download.
The damage to studios from piracy is based on the assumption that people who would otherwise see the movie in the theater download it instead. This is false, it seems, so far as strict box-office is concerned.
What we might look for is an effect on DVD sales. Highly downloaded movies might see a smaller proportion of revenue from DVD sales than less downloaded movies, if piracy is really damaging.