Will James Bond ever lose its wide appeal?

SzonanaSzonana Mexico
edited August 2016 in Bond Movies Posts: 1,130
Im asking this because the franchi has been put into the question three times, is time to be over. ?

1st time : the not so successful box office numbers of licence to kill, the 6 year haitus and the end of the cold war made people wonder if there was still space for Bond in the 90s ? the answer with Goldeneye at that time was Yes, Bond is still very popular and there is space for him. It just needed to rest a while so people wouldn't take the character for granted.

2nd time in 2002 with the 9/11 and the change of tone of the movie Industry made audiences and critics wonder again if a franchise as shallow with an almost untouchable character like Bond will be well recived by the people who were not anymore in the mood for fantasy like characters and now wanted realism
The answer again was yes, the character just has to change and show why Bond fits with these audiences who want more real heroes but yes Bond is very well loved.

Now Spectre has made critics ask the same question : is it time to let the franchise rest in peace? And is it now just a series for the fans and will be now treated as a series of cult that only Bond fans will go to see ?

This time i think they are overreacting just because Spectre didn't surpass the numbers of Skyfall in an overcrowded year of franchises. and having StarWars almost two weeks after Spectre well it was natural it wouldn't live up to Eon's expectations.
I think Bond is still very popular with all audiences and the next time we will surpass the numbers of Skyfall.


But these threee times has made wonder will it ever happen that Bond will really be out of fashion and only fans of the franchise will care for the movies to slowly drive us to point of putting it an end.?

I hope it never happens and the times the question comes will be be for a brief time but producers prove them wrong.




«13

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Can't see it myself. As a character Bond has and will change, humour can be
    Turned up or down. The films can have more fantasy elements added or made
    To be more realistic.
    So Bond can change, for different tastes and generations. So I'd say he'll
    Always be popular.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Agreed. Bond will always survive. As a character and an idea, he is forever enticing. A curious & unique combination of style, grit, swagger, intellect, independence & righteousness.

    Post-Brexit, his appeal will be even stronger imho.
  • Posts: 1,296
    The appeal of James Bond will always be wide and loose, and when it is so I think we can all agree that we get the best films, the best storeies, pure entertainment, the title songs the ski chases, classic dialgoue, glimmering henchmen, seductive Bondgirls, all of it together in a delxue package of escapism and hope for the future. yes I know there have been 3 big questions about the series before but are we headed for another one no I don;'t think so, see you at the theatres in the fall of 2019 for the next Bond adventure.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,298
    I don't think people are ready for Bond to go away any time soon. On the contrary, all the tabloid gossip about who the next Bond will be shows that a healthy interest still exisits. Perhaps a growing number of people are just ready for a change.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,522
    'Ever' is a long time. In which case it almost certainly will lose it's appeal at some point. But, not while BB is in control.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,491
    I think EON and Mendes miscalculated the appeal of old characters and storylines. If Bond is going to survive, it will be because he and the stories will transcend the franchise. This was what happened with SF and why the film was a huge success. SP went backwards, in a sense.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    TripAces wrote: »
    I think EON and Mendes miscalculated the appeal of old characters and storylines. If Bond is going to survive, it will be because he and the stories will transcend the franchise. This was what happened with SF and why the film was a huge success. SP went backwards, in a sense.
    I agree. SF was surprising. Fresh, although flawed. SP was predictable - too much so for many, in an era when the general public and much of the fandom expect innovation. It was, to some extent, a tribute act - greatest hits package imho.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,121
    Bond isn't going anywhere. Audiences will always pay to see it. The real question is, are EoN still capable of making good Bond films? The cinematic landscape has changed so much in the last 10 years alone and the TV landscape has evolved to an arguably better standard in the same amount of time if not less.

    EoN need to make fundamental changes and bring in new blood if they want to successfully move forward. Bond as a brand isn't enough. The quality has to deliver; so that means, new writers, a new director and a new composer. The best writing, acting and music talent at the moment and it's been this way for quite sometime are found in Television. EoN need to scrap their hoarding of dead weight and take a major step outside if their comfort zone and work with new and better talent.
  • Posts: 1,377
    My question is, can the series continue to satisfy hard core James Bond thoroughly without them saying "well some parts were better than others", "Well at least it was better that the last one", "That was OK but I think they should have done this or that". I've not felt truly awed with a James Bond film in years. The general public will always go a see a 007 film to enjoy themselves but as a hard core Bond fan I've not felt that there has been a great Bond film in long time that I thought was THE BEST FILM I SAW ALL YEAR!
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Bond isn't going anywhere. Audiences will always pay to see it. The real question is, are EoN still capable of making good Bond films? The cinematic landscape has changed so much in the last 10 years alone and the TV landscape has evolved to an arguably better standard in the same amount of time if not less.

    EoN need to make fundamental changes and bring in new blood if they want to successfully move forward. Bond as a brand isn't enough. The quality has to deliver; so that means, new writers, a new director and a new composer. The best writing, acting and music talent at the moment and it's been this way for quite sometime are found in Television. EoN need to scrap their hoarding of dead weight and take a major step outside if their comfort zone and work with new and better talent.


    Well in the 60s Bond as a Brand was enough because it was one of the very few franchises around. but you are right at this moment the producers can't rely just on the brand anymore they have to do their best films to compete with the rest.

    And i guess the franchise has had its highs and lows, Spectre just dissapointed in the sense it didn't brake the billion mark but if Skyfall wouldn't have set such a mark Spectre would have been considered a Success. It's only because of the previous unprecedent hit that critics say it was a dissapointment.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,121
    Forget the finances for a second because Bond will always be profitable to some degree. The real concern is the creative aspect of the films. In this day and age, we have so many tentpoles and franchises dominating the cinema screens, every month of the year and films like Bond need to stand out like a star player and not stick out like a sore thumb.

    SP's problem wasn't that it didn't make a $Billion; no Bond movie needs to gross that much. The problem was, that the film was made using a terrible script and worse yet, they dumped an obscene amount of money into the budget of what was essentially a slightly less than mediocre movie but was fortunate enough to gross $800million.

    Exchange rates go up and down. Had SP been released in 2014, it would have made circa $Billion but the film critically would have still been the same.

    Yes, Bond has already established its legacy but Bond films will continue and as such they need to be well made films that capture the interest of audiences and for audiences to go and see the movies again and again. FRWL and CR aren't selling whatever the next Bond movie is; Bond 25 needs to sell itself on its own merits. Just look at some of the output of movies and TV shows currently out or coming out; the skill and creativity involved puts to shame the recent Bond efforts. There's no pretence, there's no pontification or grandstanding. It's just pure creativity and skill coming together to create satisfying entertainment with engaging larger than life characters.

    Any one of us can ramble on about the issues plaguing the Bond films but the all encompassing problem that needs major attention is the writing. EoN, if you're listening, concentrate on hiring brand new talented writers and keep the channel of communication between yourselves and the writers open throughout the process to avoid sour surprises. Everyone needs to be on the same page and not desperately scrambling around panicking because you fucked up.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Forget the finances for a second because Bond will always be profitable to some degree. The real concern is the creative aspect of the films. In this day and age, we have so many tentpoles and franchises dominating the cinema screens, every month of the year and films like Bond need to stand out like a star player and not stick out like a sore thumb.

    SP's problem wasn't that it didn't make a $Billion; no Bond movie needs to gross that much. The problem was, that the film was made using a terrible script and worse yet, they dumped an obscene amount of money into the budget of what was essentially a slightly less than mediocre movie but was fortunate enough to gross $800million.

    Exchange rates go up and down. Had SP been released in 2014, it would have made circa $Billion but the film critically would have still been the same.

    Yes, Bond has already established its legacy but Bond films will continue and as such they need to be well made films that capture the interest of audiences and for audiences to go and see the movies again and again. FRWL and CR aren't selling whatever the next Bond movie is; Bond 25 needs to sell itself on its own merits. Just look at some of the output of movies and TV shows currently out or coming out; the skill and creativity involved puts to shame the recent Bond efforts. There's no pretence, there's no pontification or grandstanding. It's just pure creativity and skill coming together to create satisfying entertainment with engaging larger than life characters.

    Any one of us can ramble on about the issues plaguing the Bond films but the all encompassing problem that needs major attention is the writing. EoN, if you're listening, concentrate on hiring brand new talented writers and keep the channel of communication between yourselves and the writers open throughout the process to avoid sour surprises. Everyone needs to be on the same page and not desperately scrambling around panicking because you fucked up.


    Yes i guess now its all about good writing.


    The highs and lows i meant artistically but at the end we can say so in both aspects ( Artistically and financially)
    Casino Royale was one of the most liked Bond films but Quantum dissapointed to latter the producers redeem themselves with Skyfall and now they had another low with Spectre though not as bad as the one with Quantum.

    I agree The quality should be more constant since now on like you said the competition now is bigger, in the early days Bond was just going against starwars now we have thousands of franchises which people love and big part of those are from DC and Marvel.





  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,283
    Bond, like Holms, is forever.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,121
    Szonana wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Forget the finances for a second because Bond will always be profitable to some degree. The real concern is the creative aspect of the films. In this day and age, we have so many tentpoles and franchises dominating the cinema screens, every month of the year and films like Bond need to stand out like a star player and not stick out like a sore thumb.

    SP's problem wasn't that it didn't make a $Billion; no Bond movie needs to gross that much. The problem was, that the film was made using a terrible script and worse yet, they dumped an obscene amount of money into the budget of what was essentially a slightly less than mediocre movie but was fortunate enough to gross $800million.

    Exchange rates go up and down. Had SP been released in 2014, it would have made circa $Billion but the film critically would have still been the same.

    Yes, Bond has already established its legacy but Bond films will continue and as such they need to be well made films that capture the interest of audiences and for audiences to go and see the movies again and again. FRWL and CR aren't selling whatever the next Bond movie is; Bond 25 needs to sell itself on its own merits. Just look at some of the output of movies and TV shows currently out or coming out; the skill and creativity involved puts to shame the recent Bond efforts. There's no pretence, there's no pontification or grandstanding. It's just pure creativity and skill coming together to create satisfying entertainment with engaging larger than life characters.

    Any one of us can ramble on about the issues plaguing the Bond films but the all encompassing problem that needs major attention is the writing. EoN, if you're listening, concentrate on hiring brand new talented writers and keep the channel of communication between yourselves and the writers open throughout the process to avoid sour surprises. Everyone needs to be on the same page and not desperately scrambling around panicking because you fucked up.


    Yes i guess now its all about good writing.


    The highs and lows i meant artistically but at the end we can say so in both aspects ( Artistically and financially)
    Casino Royale was one of the most liked Bond films but Quantum dissapointed to latter the producers redeem themselves with Skyfall and now they had another low with Spectre though not as bad as the one with Quantum.

    I agree The quality should be more constant since now on like you said the competition now is bigger, in the early days Bond was just going against starwars now we have thousands of franchises which people love and big part of those are from DC and Marvel.





    Exactly.

    I'm particularly frustrated with EoN because they've been in the game long enough to know and do better than what they've been doing lately. Theyre now trying to chase tge $Billion margin and simultaneously Oscar bait. What EoN need to do is go back and adherr to the basics that make films elevated and special.

    Bond has faced many threats to its survival and has successfully swatted them away. As things stand, EoN themselves are Bond's biggest threat. I'm confident in EoN's overall ability so I'm not bothered about things like casting because all that won't really matter until EoN bone up and sort out the incumbency of getting their scripts right which is the focal point of my overwhelming concern. Once preproduction on Bond 25 gains some traction it'll be very interesting to see what direction EoN take with their scripting process.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,130
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Szonana wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Forget the finances for a second because Bond will always be profitable to some degree. The real concern is the creative aspect of the films. In this day and age, we have so many tentpoles and franchises dominating the cinema screens, every month of the year and films like Bond need to stand out like a star player and not stick out like a sore thumb.

    SP's problem wasn't that it didn't make a $Billion; no Bond movie needs to gross that much. The problem was, that the film was made using a terrible script and worse yet, they dumped an obscene amount of money into the budget of what was essentially a slightly less than mediocre movie but was fortunate enough to gross $800million.

    Exchange rates go up and down. Had SP been released in 2014, it would have made circa $Billion but the film critically would have still been the same.

    Yes, Bond has already established its legacy but Bond films will continue and as such they need to be well made films that capture the interest of audiences and for audiences to go and see the movies again and again. FRWL and CR aren't selling whatever the next Bond movie is; Bond 25 needs to sell itself on its own merits. Just look at some of the output of movies and TV shows currently out or coming out; the skill and creativity involved puts to shame the recent Bond efforts. There's no pretence, there's no pontification or grandstanding. It's just pure creativity and skill coming together to create satisfying entertainment with engaging larger than life characters.

    Any one of us can ramble on about the issues plaguing the Bond films but the all encompassing problem that needs major attention is the writing. EoN, if you're listening, concentrate on hiring brand new talented writers and keep the channel of communication between yourselves and the writers open throughout the process to avoid sour surprises. Everyone needs to be on the same page and not desperately scrambling around panicking because you fucked up.


    Yes i guess now its all about good writing.


    The highs and lows i meant artistically but at the end we can say so in both aspects ( Artistically and financially)
    Casino Royale was one of the most liked Bond films but Quantum dissapointed to latter the producers redeem themselves with Skyfall and now they had another low with Spectre though not as bad as the one with Quantum.

    I agree The quality should be more constant since now on like you said the competition now is bigger, in the early days Bond was just going against starwars now we have thousands of franchises which people love and big part of those are from DC and Marvel.





    Exactly.

    I'm particularly frustrated with EoN because they've been in the game long enough to know and do better than what they've been doing lately. Theyre now trying to chase tge $Billion margin and simultaneously Oscar bait. What EoN need to do is go back and adherr to the basics that make films elevated and special.

    Bond has faced many threats to its survival and has successfully swatted them away. As things stand, EoN themselves are Bond's biggest threat. I'm confident in EoN's overall ability so I'm not bothered about things like casting because all that won't really matter until EoN bone up and sort out the incumbency of getting their scripts right which is the focal point of my overwhelming concern. Once preproduction on Bond 25 gains some traction it'll be very interesting to see what direction EoN take with their scripting process.

    I don't know if they are truly after the one Billion mark if they would have, Spectre would have been much better promoted and with a much bigger campaign.

    Something which worries me is that Physical copies like dvds and bluerays are becoming obsolete and that part was a 50% of the campaign. Every anniversary they were doing their ultimate Bond collection so everyone would go and see the next film.

    It was like go and buy your collection, update yourself into Bond so you will be ready for.....
    And selling those dvds, VHS and blueray were push so people would latter be interested on Bond.

    With Spectre these aspect was just for the US and Uk while bond 50 was sold everywhere. I think they didn't make much copies of their most recent editions because they knew people rarely buy dvd and bluerays.

    Actually im pretty sad able these in probably 10 years you will now only be able to dowmload your Bond collection and its not as exciting as going for yoir movies to your next mvie store.

    Here in Mexico many movie stores are closing and department stores which have dvds are making those sections smaller every day.
    Last monday i went with one of my bffs to a department store which a few months ago had a good movies department and when we asked for it they told us they took it to the last floor where sold books when i got there the new section was really small it depressed me big time firts thinking that I wouldn't add more movies to my collection and latter thinking of Bond.

    Can imagine that in 10 years we won't have another chance for a cool Bond collection like Bond 50. ?
    It makes me sad i became a Bond fan in the digital era.

    at first I thought Netflix, ITunes and similars were a blessing since I could rent any movie i wanted on a fair price within worrying about returning them on time and sucked at returning any movie on time and didn't adventure much on blind buys but now sometimes I think inhate them.


    I won't go to movie stores to buy movies for my collection and get excited to open them and see the art work and stuff like that it will be as simple as one click.

    I thought it would never happen to film what happened to the music industry. Actors cant open a movie by their names and singers don't get the platinum and diamond disc award anymore for x number of copies sold.

    It was a bitt of a headache but the movie and msuic industries were much more glamorous and cooler when we bought dvds.


  • Posts: 6,432
    Bond will always bounce back when and if needed, there is too much rich history not many things in entertainment/media have the strong foundations Bond has.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    A great question. If we compare the old & new in the franchise it demonstrates the degree to which Bond has morphed in order to keep up with changing tastes etc. Will he survive indefinitely? A difficult one. Most likely yes but not perhaps in the form we now know?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Forget the finances for a second because Bond will always be profitable to some degree. The real concern is the creative aspect of the films. In this day and age, we have so many tentpoles and franchises dominating the cinema screens, every month of the year and films like Bond need to stand out like a star player and not stick out like a sore thumb.

    SP's problem wasn't that it didn't make a $Billion; no Bond movie needs to gross that much. The problem was, that the film was made using a terrible script and worse yet, they dumped an obscene amount of money into the budget of what was essentially a slightly less than mediocre movie but was fortunate enough to gross $800million.

    Exchange rates go up and down. Had SP been released in 2014, it would have made circa $Billion but the film critically would have still been the same.

    Yes, Bond has already established its legacy but Bond films will continue and as such they need to be well made films that capture the interest of audiences and for audiences to go and see the movies again and again. FRWL and CR aren't selling whatever the next Bond movie is; Bond 25 needs to sell itself on its own merits. Just look at some of the output of movies and TV shows currently out or coming out; the skill and creativity involved puts to shame the recent Bond efforts. There's no pretence, there's no pontification or grandstanding. It's just pure creativity and skill coming together to create satisfying entertainment with engaging larger than life characters.

    Any one of us can ramble on about the issues plaguing the Bond films but the all encompassing problem that needs major attention is the writing. EoN, if you're listening, concentrate on hiring brand new talented writers and keep the channel of communication between yourselves and the writers open throughout the process to avoid sour surprises. Everyone needs to be on the same page and not desperately scrambling around panicking because you fucked up.

    Please read the above post Babs.

    P&W aren't up to the job and haven't been for err well ever.

    It's frankly embarassing to us as Bond fans to have such low rent writers on the job. Admittedly they may know their Fleming which I would like to say is important but actually it's not. We all know our Fleming on here but would you hire any of us? Exactly.

    It's all well and good paying for top talent elsewhere like Waltz, Bardem, Fiennes, Deakins etc but if you get cut price writers their ineptitude will run through the film like a cancer and undermine whatever good work everyone else does.

    Hiring the best writers you can find should be top priority for B25, far in advance of keeping Dan. Let them write and if they don't know the character inside out you watch over them and make sure the right elements are in place as regards faithfulness to Fleming.

    Personally I don't know why you don't give Gatiss a blank cheque. He knows his Fleming and has proved with a similarly iconic character he can write creative, engaging adventures set in the modern day whilst staying faithful to the source material.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 16,097
    Can't quibble with any of that, Wiz. I agree that Mark Gatiss would be a great and proven talent to write a Bond film.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    I agree. The writing has been abysmal.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I too would love to see what Mark Gatiss would do @Dragonpol
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 16,097
    I too would love to see what Mark Gatiss would do @Dragonpol

    Mr Gatiss surely couldn't do any worse anyway! ;)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2016 Posts: 11,121
    @Wiz makes a good point. Just because one may know Fleming it doesn't mean they're suitable for the job.

    EoN really need to hire competent screen writers first and foremost. They can eat, breathe and sleep Bond all day but if their primary occupation is to write screen plays and the best they can craft is some mediocre guff at best then we're never going to get anything remotely decent. The shambles and course correcting EoN were doing with SP after Logan turned in his sorry excuse of a script is something that could have been avoided and I pray doesn't happen again.

    EoN need to step their game up and take a more proactive approach than what they've been doing with the last 2 or 3 films. It's time to get out of the comfort zone and be the hungry producers Bond needs. Strategize a financial plan that at best eliminates waste and at worst minimises it; keep to reasonable budget, take a more cut-throat approach if necessary AND pay good money for talented new writers. Have them come in, pitch ideas as to where the characters and story's going and once things are agreeable; start drafting treatments.

    The production process now more than ever has to be run with precision. I can't stress enough just how devastating an experience course correcting can be, especially with it potentially compromising schedules. Bond needs direction. If they want to give him an arc, fine; if it's stand alone adventures, fine. What definitely needs to be understood is a clear sense of direction and then stick to it.

    It needs to be understood that people these days appreciate the value of a well made film on a basic level. Scripting structure, editing and characterisation are key components on the most fundamental level of a film; and if these criteria are poorly realised or not realised at all, particularly for a film of blockbuster and event level status then one might as well not bother making it in the first place or prepare for a short-lived career in the business.

    There's no such thing as a brand or an IP than can never lose it's appeal. Present something that's crappy enough and eventually that goodwill is gone like a fart in the wind. We live in times where in less than 24 hours, a group of people can literally hop on line and destroy something that's been years in the making. EoN need to do more than work hard, they need to work smart.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »

    The production process now more than ever has to be run with precision. I can't stress enough just how devastating an experience course correcting can be, especially with it potentially compromising schedules. Bond needs direction. If they want to give him an arc, fine; if it's stand alone adventures, fine. What definitely needs to be understood is a clear sense of direction and then stick to it.

    You hit on two very key points.

    1. You need to get the script locked down months before you start filming not 5 minutes before. Desperately polishing it as filming takes place on other scenes invites disaster. QOS and SP just about got away with it (only just) but I'm concerned that for two of the last three films the script has still been being worked on right up to the last minute.

    2. Either make a trilogy, quadrilogy or stand alone films or whatever. But think about what you are going to do before you do it and plan it all out. I hate to cite Marvel as the people to copy as I find their sausage factory approach of turning out identikit films depressing in the extreme. But where you can't criticise them is they know exactly where they are going and have a planned strategy that they are adhering to.

    With the Craig era we rebooted with CR and at the end with White Bond was finally the Bond we know and love. But then we carried on the Vesper arc and at the end of that when it was all done with this time Bond was finally the Bond we know and love. But then in SF we introduced MP, Q and a new M and got the old office back and then this was finally the Bond we know and love 3 films after the process started (despite spending the whole of SF saying that he was finished and over the hill).

    So in SP Bond was finally the Bond we know and love and then at the end of that he quits??!? The whole Craig era feels like it is cobbled together with sellotape and blu-tack and could fall apart at any moment.

    I feel Dan has been let down as Pierce was before him by shoddy writing and inept direction (Campbell excepted in both cases) and the buck for this must stop with EON. Yes they've generally upped their game since the Brozza era (largely at Dan's insistence on not wanting to make something as trite as DAD I feel) but in the key aspect - the f**king writing - nothing has changed at all.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    Bond is alive and kicking, more than ever.
    Only because some critics (mainly Americans) have criticised Spectre it doesn't mean it hasn't hit all the right buttons.

    The same goes for the bloody ratings on RT and the lot. Mainly Americans participate there. If it was possible to get an Europe/East only vote, it would be somewhere in the vicinity of SF for sure!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 37,936
    You can make anything shine by going with specific country-only votes. Bet 'Warcraft' and SF would be comparable in score if they focused on China's opinion of the former.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,021
    Yeah but I'm not talking about Belgium or Monaco but the World only excluding Northern America LOL
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited August 2016 Posts: 37,936
    I highly doubt America was the sole reason this received a worse score than SF; scrolling through the rotten reviews, I see a lot of them stemming from other countries, too.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Yeah but I'm not talking about Belgium or Monaco but the World only excluding Northern America LOL

    Yes of course you are quite right. SP is a triumph. How can we argue with your logic?
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2016 Posts: 9,021
    Yeah but I'm not talking about Belgium or Monaco but the World only excluding Northern America LOL

    Yes of course you are quite right. SP is a triumph. How can we argue with your logic?

    It's not my logic. It's based on ticket sales in Europe. If SP had been that mediocre it would never have had that numbers of tickets sold.
Sign In or Register to comment.