Are there any concerns over the box office prospects of Bond 25?
Personally, I'm a tad concerned as I think November/December are a little cluttered. When SF came out it was really bereft of any major competition. The only real challenger was Twilight and it didn't really stand much of a chance against SF after it's opening weekend came and went. However, SP did very well, but it did get stifled by the strong competition that surrounded it.
Bond 25 will have an even harder time. The film opens in the USA one week after Wonder Woman 1984. The first film was a hit and had a big cultural moment. The momentum will only increase with the sequel, which will almost certainly be bigger (possibly even a $1billion gross?). However, much of this will depend on quality. Despite the love and gender debate, Wonder Woman was a very average film. I can see the sequel being less revered.
Furthermore, you have both Star Wars Episode IX and Frozen 2 coming in the weeks that follow (both are likely to get to $1billion). Also, the Terminator reboot and Masters of the Universe are likely to gain the attention of young males who could otherwise have bought tickets for Bond 25.
Looking at the release schedule, I think Bond 25 should move up its international release date to the end of October.
I know everyone here things Bond is teflon-coated, but the flop of Solo: Star Wars Story can't be underestimated. It displayed that franchises can go stale. The Craig revolution has gone, and his films (especially SP) have left a bad taste. I can see Bond 25 underperforming at the domestic box office, especially with the untested Annapurna distributing and marketing.
SF aside, Craig's films haven't excelled at the NA b.o:
SP struggled to get to $200m (an important milestone), QOS failed to get its budget and CR was a modest success. The international numbers will hopefully play a huge part down the track (as they always do with Bond). I think the UK will turn up in droves to see a Danny Boyle/Daniel Craig Bond movie.
Obviously, so much is dependent on the quality of the film. Bond 25 may be brilliant and it may have a killer cast. But if Bond wants to succeed it's going to need a big sell. SF was the perfect storm (Adele's song, the Olympics skit, the 50th anniversary, the Sam Mendes factor, etc.), and I feel that hiring Danny Boyle is the right step to replicating that film's box office magic. Boyle just need to put together a terrific film that can play through Thanksgiving and Xmas.
Personally, it could go both ways. but considering the bad taste SP left (it's a very unrememberable film), the fatigue of Craig in the role, Craig's distasteful past comments about the part (believe me, people are still talking about this), and the long delay between films (general audiences appear to have forgotten about Bond - no one is really clamouring for Bond 25). I can see Bond 25 suffering.
That said, I predict Bond 25 will do between $ 800-900 millions.
I don't think Bond will be back on top until they get a new lead actor in the role of 007, personally.
Quantum of Solace: about the same. Successful, but I expected much more, really thought EON were building an audience with the 2006 film.
Skyfall: blew the roof off the box office, a surprise it reached $1.1 Billion.
Spectre: still an over the top success at $880 Million.
BOND 25: I predict more than Spectre, approaching Skyfall numbers. And a good Bond film.
Remember, Danny Boyle is a very uncommercial filmmaker. He's had a great track record of making unprofitable films.
Yes, Star Wars IX will take a huge chunk of the b.o. But WW84 could possibly destroy Bond at the b.o. There is a very good chance that WW84 holds over and Bond doesn't win its opening weekend. No one is really asking for Bond 25; everyone is waiting with baited breath for the next superhero movie.
Daniel Craig isn't exactly a "star" and the Bond franchise doesn't have strong legs in the USA. Meanwhile, Gal Gadot can work the press circuit and will go on another charisma warpath and sell WW84. The last film made $412,563,408 in the USA (that's more than double the amount that SP made).
Though it would be oddly just for a misogynistic icon of a forgotten-era getting beaten by a feminist and progressive film character - imagine the think pieces online.
Now, I know that idea can be a little depressing to our more conservative and less open-minded members, so now would be a perfect time to post a picture of Gal Gadot just to distract from the pain.
Why exactly is Bond25 a disaster waiting to happen?
I honestly don't care what the film does as long as it's a film I like. We know Craig isn't coming back after this one. We know a new actor will most likely have the curiosity factor on his side. So even if the film "only" makes 350 million, if it's another LTK, i.e. a film I love but which contemporary audiences fail to appreciate, I will be a happy Bond fan.
I understand the importance of big BO performances in a franchise that has to also invest a lot in order to maintain visual splendour, but the quality of a film and its financial successes are two separate things for me.
Some here have treated Spectre's 800 million as a "huge disappointment". Why? Because SF raised the bar to ridiculous heights and suddenly you need to make over a billion to play with the big boys? The Phantom Menace made close to a billion while TWINE only made 362 million. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and even The Da Vinci Code made way more than Casino Royale in 2006. Should I treat CR as a lesser film then? Should I call the Craig era a failure because 3 out of 4 Craig films didn't reach that year's top 3? I mean, even Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull made more than QOS. So? Like Star Trek, Bond is sure to keep a lot of loyal fans but the days of reigning at the BO are over and have been over for many decades. Superheros, fast machismo cars and dinosaurs are "it".
I do, however, agree that the costs of the films needn't be so high. I have little criticism of SP to give, except that I just don't see where the money went. Two or three big explosions? Anything else I'm missing here? Look, if they can keep the costs, promotional costs included, in check, there should be little fear. Given the longevity of the series, the Bond franchise is a cow that allows eternal milking. These films continue to bring the money home. Whatever happens, it's probably fine. SF was a fluke, not the new standard.
Because it won't star Aidan Turner.
You're missing the point.
We're not discussing the artistic merits of the Craig films (I like all his films). We're discussing the commercial and business aspects of his films and the likely financial implications of a Bond film underperforming. The quality of the film, nor our opinion of it, has any bearing on this discussion.
If Bond 25 wants to gross in excess of $800m at the box office, then it'll need strong legs in North America. International audiences will likely show up, but even then Bond shouldn't take them for advantage.
You're correct though, there are ways for Eon to counter against this possible issue. One idea is to move away from the big $200m blockbuster model and do a smaller $100m movie, in the same vein as Logan. This way you can guarantee a hit, give Craig a chance at a great performance (which is always good marketing for an actor's final film) and go for a harder rating.
I don't think Eon will do this. They'll do something akin to Skyfall and play to the rafters. I wouldn't be surprised if Angelina Jolie is the villain, or if someone like Beyonce does the theme. If Eon go after names like this, they could be looking at another $250m film and the chance of hitting $1billion at the international box office.
They should get their usual 24m viewers in the US (give or take a few thousand). Anything less will be seen as a major failure. That will translate into approximately $200M US, inflation adjusted to 2019 $, whatever that will be at the time.
From what I can tell, EON isn't prioritizing the US market with this one though. If they were, they wouldn't keep that 2 week window between international and US release, but rather would push it out all at once like was done with Infinity War. The staggered release will hurt the US numbers and I'm sure they know that (yes, it worked with SF, but it won't work this time around because the press are onto the game). Wonder Woman has a big chance of holding it out of the #1 slot in its second (and Bond's first) week of release and I expect them to hold the majority of the IMAX slots too. I don't think Craig is a big draw stateside either, with SF being an exception.
In lieu, I expect a big international push, using the focused marketing power and expertise of Universal. I read recently that they are shooting for a $1bn international gross. If anyone can get them there, it will be Universal.
Overall, I tend to agree with the OP on most points.
Oh no, not at all. I wasn't missing the point. ;) Merely wanted to clarify my personal thoughts about the significance of a BO performance.
Obviously I expect Bond 25 to do "well", say somewhere around 800 million.
Skyfall and Spectre did very good at the Dutch boxoffice with double the view numbers. 1.8 - 2 million views. 25 million for SF and 22 with Spectre. Starswars did almoost 16 million in 2015 and 13 million in 2017.
In 2012 the first Hobbit movie end after Skyfall with almoost 16 million and Starswars and The Lion King will fight for that second and thirth place. 13-16 million. In 2012 '' Intouchables '' be big suprise with the 3th place with 12 million. Jungle Book did almoost 11 million (10,665) in 2016 for 3the place. It whas very close to be second who go to Fantastic Beast with 10,9 million. Bridget Jones 3 whas winner in 2016 with almoost 12 million. In 2015 Jurassic World did almoost that money for the 4th place. Minnions 3th with 14,4.
Present Jurassic World opens with 3,2 million (127 screens, in 2015 Jurassic World opens with 2,9 (123 screens).
Deadpool whas big hit, so mabey Dombo (Dumbo) wil be next years suprise. 6-8 million.
Bond 25 (16-19)
The Lion King (13-16)
Captain Marvel (10-11)
How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (4-5)
Toy Story 4 (4-5) Cars 3 did 3 million.
Lego movie 2 (3-4) first did 4,5 but Batman lego did 3 million.
Possible les then 3:
Godzilla: King of the Monsters (first did les then 3 (Rampage did even les (2,3) , but Skull island did almoost 4)
Angel Has Fallen
Now You See Me 3 (wil be delayd i think. Last one did 2,9, but now mabey 2,4)
X-Men: Dark Phoenix (Apocalypse did 2,4 but expect mabey it go les then 2)
John Wick 3 (400.000 - 600.000)
If he asks for a glass of water at the press conference, do not oblige the man.
I have no idea but taken out of context it may show that he has displeasure with the part therefore it could negatively impact how he portrayed in the film. Personally I never heard those comments until way after I'd seen Spectre.
In the United States in 2015? No.
In terms of *number of tickets sold* in the US market, it has been between 23 million and 27 million since 1995.
The one exception: Skyfall, which sold 37 million or so tickets in the U.S.
In the U.S. market, Bond simply fell back to his normal range with SPECTRE (albeit at the low end of the range); SPECTRE sold just about 23 million tickets in the U.S.
SP felt like box-ticking. CR and SF just did „their thing“ and that worked out just great (even no movie will be everybody‘s favourite). Even QoS was NO flop by any means - the budget was too high.
Craig is well beloved in the role - that is just a matter of fact. If he is past his prime, B25 will show it.
On the water rights?
You would expect more from a 200 million dollar budget, though. As an example I remember The Revenant cost 135 million, and predictions were that it would have to make back close to 400 million to cover it's costs.
Quantum probably started to turn a profit at around the 500 million dollar mark. Then the profit is broken amongst the various parties, so in the end it's not exactly a windfall. Skyfall is another story ofcourse. I expect them to cut costs drastically with Bond 25 to around 120 - 150 million budget. This will involve giving Boyle and Craig as much freedom as possible, and hoping critical hype will push the film. The last few Bond films have done well when they have gone with some unexpected angle, rather than delivering on formula (which is more costly anyway), so I expect they will follow this idea to its terminus, with a more ideas and thematically driven emotional piece. Basically Skyfall but more toned down on the spectacle and traditional Bondian elements.