Rank the Bond Decades in order of how well they did against other films

ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
in Bond Movies Posts: 1,984
On my "nadir of the Bond franchise" thread, there was discussion of how the Bond decades fared against the competition of their time. I'd like to a make a thread dedicated to that, and partly to break away from the negativity trend of the moment. So, rank (and justify if you can) each of Bond's decades based on how well they fared against the other films of their time, particularly its direct competition.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts - maybe base it a bit on box office, but also standing legacy in comparison to other films.

Comments

  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    The list I'm about to post will be based on its box office placement of films exclusively. Information sourced from: http://www.teako170.com/box60-69.html

    I'll list each decade, then the average box office rank of that decade in brackets, rounded up.

    1st. 60's (2nd Place Average) - DN and GF made it to the top of the list in spite of '62 and '64 being highly competitive years, and the others were all second in their respective years, normally with something huge beating them - Cleopatra, The Sound of Music, Butch Cassidy). The only exception is YOLT, which finished third behind The Jungle Book and The Graduate. Still, every Bond film here made it to at least top three, with only one finishing third. Three came in second, and two were even first!

    2nd. 70's (3rd Place Average) - Not a bad showing overall, with DAF coming a comfortable first in '71, but competition wasn't particularly notable except fellow action films like Dirty Harry and The French Connection. By cashing on the Star Wars craze, MR also came first in '79, but only just, though it did beat some fairly strong competition (Rocky II, Alien, Star Trek, Kramer vs Kramer, Apocalypse Now). Unfortunately, compliments are much more reserved for Moore's other three outings - LALD came in 3rd behind The Exorcist and The Sting in '73, still a respectable showing. TMWTGG was a close fourth, losing to the likes of The Godfather: Part II. Surprisingly, the worst showing was in '77 by what is widely considered to be Moore's magnum opus, TSWLM, which came in a very distant fourth behind the Star Wars (which, in fairness, was colossal in its time and comfortably beats the next three films on the list combined), Close Encounters of a Third Kind, and Saturday Night Fever. Quite disappointingly, SNF, which came in 3rd, beat TSWLM (4th) by $100 million, which is equivalent to almost $400 million today.

    3rd. 10's (4th Place Average) - Thanks to huge advertisement, Bond's Golden Anniversary wildcard SF slides into a comfortable second, beating stalwarts like The Dark Knight Rises, An Unexpected Journey and another Ice Age entry to finish behind The Avengers. Without such benefits, Bond's 2015 showcase of SP lands 6th, right behind Disney's Minions. Huge action blockbusters round out the top 5 - Age of Ultron, Furious 7, Jurassic World and above all, The Force Awakens.

    Tie 4th. 90's (5th Place Average) - GE enters halfway into the decade, but it's a close third in its year, just being beaten by Toy Story and Die Hard: With a Vengeance, while it beats some hefty competition like Apollo 13 and Batman Forever, though beating the latter isn't really something to write home about. Bond's '97 showing is far less glamorous - TND comes in a very distant fourth, crushed by Titanic, The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Men In Black, which, granted are all pretty big films. TND does manage to beat films like Air Force One and Liar Liar, though. Come '99 and Bond slips close to its box office fiasco ten years ago. This time, TWINE finishes 9th, overwhelmed by huge pop culture sensations like The Phantom Menace, The Sixth Sense and Toy Story 2, but also by lesser entries like The Mummy and Notting Hill. Most alarmingly, Bond parody Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me is just behind TWINE's back.

    Tie 4th. 80's (5th Place Average) - Worst financial decade for Bond, but in terms of competition, Bond didn't do too bad. FYEO and OP were 2nd in their respective years of '81 and '83, losing to Raiders of the Lost Ark and Return of the Jedi, respectively. It wasn't even remotely close in either case, but given that those films are huge and remain huge today, that's not something to hold against Bond. From here, things decline dramatically. AVTAK, Bond's 2nd worst box office showing and the worst up to its time, came in a distant fourth in '85 - behind Back to the Future, Rocky IV, Rambo: First Blood Part II and Out of Africa. At this point, Moore resigns and Dalton takes over with TLD in '87. Again, it's fourth, but closer, although that's not much of a compliment considering that the films it lost to weren't really pop culture sensations at all. The decade closes out with Bond's worst box office showing in LTK, which came a shocking 11th in '89 - the lowest Bond's ever been in terms of box office placement, and the only time Bond's ever fallen out of the top ten.

    6th. 00's (6th Place Average) - DAD is the beneficiary of Bond's 40th birthday here, but even so, it only gets to 6th place in '02, right behind Men In Black II. The top 4, sitting high above the rest, include entries from the LotR, SW and HP franchises, as well as the first film in the Spider-Man series. DAD does manage to beat My Big Fat Greek Wedding and Ice Age. CR comes into a slightly distant but still very impressive 4th, beating hotties like Night at the Museum, Cars, Happy Feet and entries from Superman and X-Men. However, The Da Vinci Code and entries from Ice Age and Pirates of the Caribbean handily defeat Craig's opening Bond flick. Craig follows up with QoS '08, which is 7th behind a slew of blockbusters like The Dark Knight, Crystal Skull and Kung Fu Panda.

    That's a list sorted just for box office placements and showings against the competition.
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    The ranking is flawed because a lot of the other films don't have the international gross listed on that site. Interesting thread though
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    @w2bond - I noticed a couple of differences with Wikipedia and other sources, but I was too far into my post to correct it all. But the gross differences don't affect the placements - not often, at least. I believe TWINE is a place higher than that site suggests according to other sources.

    Regardless, that was just for reference. You guys should make your lists based on much more than just box office numbers.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    The main insight if you look at those statistics (and I studied them time and time again) is that Bond always has been amongst the most successful movies of each year they were released. That didn't ever change and probably never will.

    To rank the decades is a tricky thing. It can't be done objectively or solely based on the statistics, as ticket sales in general were not on the same levels in the 60's and 80's for example. Furthermore if you look at BO only (without ticket sales) it tells a slightly different story again.
    But in general Bond always was and always will be successful.

    To rank the 10s is especially tricky as it has only two Bond movies to date but I would rank it second behind the 60's as SF and SP belong to the group of 4 most successful Bond movies of all time no matter from which angle you look at it. The other two being GF and TB. Also the 3rd and 4th movie from the actor.
    If Bond 25 will be as successful as Spectre, the 10s will be at least at the same level as the 60's, again comparing three movies against six is tricky.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Sorry, I had 53 notifications (all of the top ten or twenty or thirty were in the nadir thread), so I didn't get a notification that you posted here @BondJasonBond006.

    But I generally agree.
Sign In or Register to comment.