NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Critical Reaction and Box Office Performance

13567172

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,409

    Audience appetites are constantly changing. The trick is either desperately cater to what you think they want, or to anticipate something new that they weren't expecting.

    This.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    bondjames wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.
    Not from a box office perspective, because the Bond films tend to outgross MI overall, although MI has been more consistent of late.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.

    I agree. MI is now what the Bourne films were in the 2000's.
    Critically I would agree. MI has critical momentum and hardcore audience 'passion' behind it these days, which is similar to Bourne in the early 00's, irrespective of overall box office numbers.

    What's interesting about these two franchises is that despite their similarities, they have very different geographical fanbases. If one studies the details, apart from the US where they are pretty much on par (SF excepted), MI (sometimes significantly) outgrosses Bond in the 'newer' expanding markets like South Korea, Japan, India, Brazil, Mexico and China. Bond conversely outgrosses MI in what Donald Rumsfeld famously termed 'old Europe', most notably UK, Germany, the Nordic countries and Italy as well as in Australia. France is closer, with Bond still ahead. I'd imagine that both franchises would like to expand their viewer base in the others territory, but it will be difficult. James Bond (particularly with Daniel Craig as lead) doesn't seem to me like something that would appeal to Asian markets. Their heroes, at least in my observation, tend to be more younger looking, cleaner cut and almost 'asexual' in appearance. Cruise-like in fact. Narratively, Bond also doesn't seem like something that would be as appealing there in comparison to the more 'action heavy' and easily translatable MI.

    In terms of B25, I suppose it will all depend on what direction Boyle takes. From what I can see so far, I'd imagine a very powerful UK/Europe gross again, but can't see it doing too well stateside where enthusiasm appears tepid at best (the articles about a new Bond actor continue to percolate despite Craig's return, suggesting that is the narrative that has a hold). It will be interesting to see how it plays given the long time away and all the press about replacements, cut wrists, money demands and so on over the past few years.

    One of the issues I find with Bond is, as of late Bond just isn't exciting. The typical circus surrounding the build up from casting to locations to theme song and press conference has pretty much been the peak and highlight but when it comes to the films themselves, it's his so disappointing. SP is THE biggest culprit here. That film was just so offensively pedestrian and the only good thing about the film relates to the best thing about the Craig era (CR) and that was the exchange/confrontation between Bond and White which lasted what, a minute and a half?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.
    Not from a box office perspective, because the Bond films tend to outgross MI overall, although MI has been more consistent of late.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.

    I agree. MI is now what the Bourne films were in the 2000's.
    Critically I would agree. MI has critical momentum and hardcore audience 'passion' behind it these days, which is similar to Bourne in the early 00's, irrespective of overall box office numbers.

    What's interesting about these two franchises is that despite their similarities, they have very different geographical fanbases. If one studies the details, apart from the US where they are pretty much on par (SF excepted), MI (sometimes significantly) outgrosses Bond in the 'newer' expanding markets like South Korea, Japan, India, Brazil, Mexico and China. Bond conversely outgrosses MI in what Donald Rumsfeld famously termed 'old Europe', most notably UK, Germany, the Nordic countries and Italy as well as in Australia. France is closer, with Bond still ahead. I'd imagine that both franchises would like to expand their viewer base in the others territory, but it will be difficult. James Bond (particularly with Daniel Craig as lead) doesn't seem to me like something that would appeal to Asian markets. Their heroes, at least in my observation, tend to be more younger looking, cleaner cut and almost 'asexual' in appearance. Cruise-like in fact. Narratively, Bond also doesn't seem like something that would be as appealing there in comparison to the more 'action heavy' and easily translatable MI.

    In terms of B25, I suppose it will all depend on what direction Boyle takes. From what I can see so far, I'd imagine a very powerful UK/Europe gross again, but can't see it doing too well stateside where enthusiasm appears tepid at best (the articles about a new Bond actor continue to percolate despite Craig's return, suggesting that is the narrative that has a hold). It will be interesting to see how it plays given the long time away and all the press about replacements, cut wrists, money demands and so on over the past few years.

    One of the issues I find with Bond is, as of late Bond just isn't exciting. The typical circus surrounding the build up from casting to locations to theme song and press conference has pretty much been the peak and highlight but when it comes to the films themselves, it's his so disappointing. SP is THE biggest culprit here. That film was just so offensively pedestrian and the only good thing about the film relates to the best thing about the Craig era (CR) and that was the exchange/confrontation between Bond and White which lasted what, a minute and a half?
    I certainly feel that there has been a certain lethargy and lack of enthusiasm around the whole thing for a while now, it's true. I personally feel that actually predated the release of SP (although I agree with you on the film itself being subpar). Not sure why. Perhaps it's because the lead hasn't been very visible since SF (he's made a few films at most and done a few theatre runs). Perhaps it's just been poor marketing. These things don't happen in a vacuum. The drumbeat has to be built up slowly and methodically, and that's a marketing skill.
  • Posts: 17,235
    doubleoego wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.
    Not from a box office perspective, because the Bond films tend to outgross MI overall, although MI has been more consistent of late.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Mission Impossible will be the one to beat.

    I agree. MI is now what the Bourne films were in the 2000's.
    Critically I would agree. MI has critical momentum and hardcore audience 'passion' behind it these days, which is similar to Bourne in the early 00's, irrespective of overall box office numbers.

    What's interesting about these two franchises is that despite their similarities, they have very different geographical fanbases. If one studies the details, apart from the US where they are pretty much on par (SF excepted), MI (sometimes significantly) outgrosses Bond in the 'newer' expanding markets like South Korea, Japan, India, Brazil, Mexico and China. Bond conversely outgrosses MI in what Donald Rumsfeld famously termed 'old Europe', most notably UK, Germany, the Nordic countries and Italy as well as in Australia. France is closer, with Bond still ahead. I'd imagine that both franchises would like to expand their viewer base in the others territory, but it will be difficult. James Bond (particularly with Daniel Craig as lead) doesn't seem to me like something that would appeal to Asian markets. Their heroes, at least in my observation, tend to be more younger looking, cleaner cut and almost 'asexual' in appearance. Cruise-like in fact. Narratively, Bond also doesn't seem like something that would be as appealing there in comparison to the more 'action heavy' and easily translatable MI.

    In terms of B25, I suppose it will all depend on what direction Boyle takes. From what I can see so far, I'd imagine a very powerful UK/Europe gross again, but can't see it doing too well stateside where enthusiasm appears tepid at best (the articles about a new Bond actor continue to percolate despite Craig's return, suggesting that is the narrative that has a hold). It will be interesting to see how it plays given the long time away and all the press about replacements, cut wrists, money demands and so on over the past few years.

    One of the issues I find with Bond is, as of late Bond just isn't exciting. The typical circus surrounding the build up from casting to locations to theme song and press conference has pretty much been the peak and highlight but when it comes to the films themselves, it's his so disappointing. SP is THE biggest culprit here. That film was just so offensively pedestrian and the only good thing about the film relates to the best thing about the Craig era (CR) and that was the exchange/confrontation between Bond and White which lasted what, a minute and a half?

    THIS! The dreary, "Oscar baity" nonsense of SF/SP isn't particularly exciting, and I can't see that angle helping the box office results in future films. Europe might be different, as Bond - a (very) European character after all - does well here almost by default.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    My top Reason for skyfall being a big hit - directed by Sam Mendes/written by John Logan/new actors- Javier bardem,Ralph fiennes,Naomie Harris,ben wishaw,Albert Finney/cinematography by Roger deakings which critics praised as best they saw in years/Music by Thomas Newman and song by Adele which won Oscars.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Jurassic world earned 1.6 billion in 2015 and it's sequel in 2018 earned 1.2 billion/ furious 7 earned 1.5 billion in 2015 and it's sequel earned 1.2 Billion as well (300 Million lesser than the first one) same as skyfall 1.1 billion)and Spectre (880 million). Avengers sequel also earned lesser than the first one but infinity war still earns 2 billion and I am expecting avengers 4 will cross Titanic by earning 2.2 billion (700 more than the first avengers). If goes by assumption bond 25 can earn 700-800 more than skyfall considering (1.8- 1.9 Billion). Casino Royale was release in 2006 when ticket prices were 6.55 $ and it earned 594 million/ skyfall was release in 2012 when ticket prices were 7.96 $ and it earned almost double than casino Royale with 1.1 billion/ In 2019 ticket prices will be 10 $ which may boost for the film to get close 2 billion. Let's not forget that skyfall was 2nd highest grossing film of 2012 after avengers beating the dark Knight rises and Hobbit.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Good news for bond 25 is that Danny Boyle is director/written by john hodge / actors are yet to be announced but mark strong and Helena Bonham Carter are rumored/ cinematographer could be someone like Roger deakins(skyfall) or hoyte van hoyetama(Spectre)/Music will be a big thing like who will sing the song and who will compose soundtrack/ this will be the final time Craig playing bond (the only bond actor to officially farewell in a prepared way). Avengers 4 and star wars will be top grossed but after that. Animated films are not going to get passed bond except frozen 2 whose first part is already ahead of skyfall. The new jungle book wasn't able to cross even skyfall so there's that for Disney films like alladin/ lion king.It chapter 2 / wonder woman/ justice league/Spiderman homecoming wasn't even able to cross spectre.Black panther crossed 1 billion because they already introduce him civil war, Captain marvel could be a bit like wonder woman earning close to 900 million or even a billion considering the story.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Jurassic world earned 1.6 billion in 2015 and it's sequel in 2018 earned 1.2 billion/ furious 7 earned 1.5 billion in 2015 and it's sequel earned 1.2 Billion as well (300 Million lesser than the first one) same as skyfall 1.1 billion)and Spectre (880 million). Avengers sequel also earned lesser than the first one but infinity war still earns 2 billion and I am expecting avengers 4 will cross Titanic by earning 2.2 billion (700 more than the first avengers). If goes by assumption bond 25 can earn 700-800 more than skyfall considering (1.8- 1.9 Billion). Casino Royale was release in 2006 when ticket prices were 6.55 $ and it earned 594 million/ skyfall was release in 2012 when ticket prices were 7.96 $ and it earned almost double than casino Royale with 1.1 billion/ In 2019 ticket prices will be 10 $ which may boost for the film to get close 2 billion. Let's not forget that skyfall was 2nd highest grossing film of 2012 after avengers beating the dark Knight rises and Hobbit.

    Lol Bond 25 won't be earning $1.anything Billion. It'll be lucky to cross $800Million.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    They can't do worse than spectre ..... Even if the movie is average it will get passed skyfall and if it's better than skyfall than I have already put some statistics above read it.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    They have already started promoting it- Danny boyle direction/Daniel last film/ Daniel Craig highest paid actor of 2019/universal will be distributing internationally. Many more to come, if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them especially when they are at their best
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    That's not how BO works.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Then how does it work do elaborate and provide some statistics here
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    It's quite simple really and doesn't require much thought at all.
    Observe the landscape.
    They can't do worse than spectre ..... Even if the movie is average it will get passed skyfall and if it's better than skyfall than I have already put some statistics above read it.

    This post makes no sense. So if bond 25 is average It'll make more than SP? Based on what? SP made $1.1 Billion and even then, that was an anomoly of a milestone. Yet, you think Bond 25 being average will make more?? You're dreaming. SP had an extra 32 days for its theatrical run and barely scraped through to touch $200M domestic and fell short of over $200M in its foreign gross. There are films out there that made more in 1 weekend than what SF and SP and any Bind f8lm for that matter made in its entire domestic run.

    It ultimately doesn't matter who's behind or in front of the camera, if the film is good, if tge talent is on display It'll do well. However, how well it does depends on various other factors like repeatability and competition.

    Bond 25 has at least the following to compete with: Wonder Woman 1984, Terminator 6, Frozen 2, Jumanji 3, Masters of the Universe and Star Wars Ep 9...you think Bond 25 will outgross SF with all these to contend with? No chance. None whatsoever. I also wouldnt be surprised if Bond 25 will have a shorter theatrical window than the last 2 Bond outings. In fact I'm expecting it.

    You mention JW and the FF movies compared to Bond but if you have any understanding of film you'll know there isnt always a direct correlation when it comes to quality with quantity. As it happens, the JW and FF movies as of late appeal to the masses moreso than Bond has and tgere are reasons for that which are quite obvious. Also, some of the best films made make the least amount of money. That being said, Bond isn't a film series that NEEDS to be grossing a $Billion. Sure, its nice but it's a film series that should be grossing around the $700 to $800M bracket. They just need to budget better which they haven't been doing effectively since QoS.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,928
    I agree with doubleoego here. Bond 25 will likely have half the budget of SP, because Boyle explicitly hates working with massive budgets. They tried a more action heavy and comedic film with SP, and that was met with a cool reception. So I think they will rein themselves in, and focus on what made SF and CR work, which was the personal angle.

    I see Bond 25 with a budget of around 120 - 150, and a target of around 650 - 750 US. It would be excellent if the film broke 800 million, as that would imply great critical reception and strong word of mouth.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.But your stats doesn't make sense at all , you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well. it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter. I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Yes I agree Boyle will have a low budget film but that doesn't mean it can't gross a billion, as far as I see it star wars and avengers 4 will be top grossing but I am unsure about the lion king and frozen 2 because they are coming after a long time. Besides these films I don't see a much of a competition for bond.... There are three finale next year - avengers/star wars/ bond 25 will be last of them.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2018 Posts: 11,139
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yes I agree Boyle will have a low budget film but that doesn't mean it can't gross a billion, as far as I see it star wars and avengers 4 will be top grossing but I am unsure about the lion king and frozen 2 because they are coming after a long time. Besides these films I don't see a much of a competition for bond.... There are three finale next year - avengers/star wars/ bond 25 will be last of them.

    Lion King will make no less than $900M. It's 100% going to walk all over and trounce Bond 25 at the BO.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    I admire your optimism, no matter how shakey it may be.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,409
    @Resurrection
    Please refrain from making double/triple posts by using the EDIT button, located under "options" in the upper right corner of every post.

    Thank you.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    Wow.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,409
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    I admire your optimism, no matter how shakey it may be.

    @CraigMooreOHMSS
    don't you just love it when people have future telling devices and "know" everything? :)
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    doubleoego wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    Wow.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    I admire your optimism, no matter how shakey it may be.
    Its based on real stats not just optimism and my personal opinion
    @CraigMooreOHMSS
    don't you just love it when people have future telling devices and "know" everything? :)

    I admire your sarcasm but it falls short like the last bond film
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    You were so busy insulting bond about box office stats that you didn't knew what you were saying otherwise you wouldn't have said that lion king will earn 900 million. Jungle book earned 900 million and beauty and the beast earned 1.2 billion . I think lion king is capable of doing much more than that upto 1.5 billion.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2018 Posts: 11,139
    You were so busy insulting bond about box office stats that you didn't knew what you were saying otherwise you wouldn't have said that lion king will earn 900 million. Jungle book earned 900 million and beauty and the beast earned 1.2 billion . I think lion king is capable of doing much more than that upto 1.5 billion.

    I wasn't insulting Bond. I presented facts and surmised based on actual real data, stats and facts. Unlike you, clearly, I know how BO trends work and can actually articulate recorded data. As for what I said about Lion King, looks like you need a new oculist. READ what I wrote. Quote it if it will help you to see what's actually written.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Spectre didn't had much to offer as much as skyfall.

    We somewhat knew that when there were reports if the script being a mess but after it was apparantly "saved" the final film despite running on the hype and success of SF WAS a major disappointment.
    But your stats doesn't make sense at all
    Actually they do.
    you are saying about Spectre didn't made 200 in domestic but did you bother to look at worldwide box office of it, it was way ahead of wonder woman, Terminator and some others as well.

    And this is where you lose points. What was the first thing I said to you in my previous post?
    Observe...
    The...
    Landscape...

    You haven't done this; and neither have you applied any meaningful context.

    Worldwide, SP ONLY beat out Wonder Woman by about $60Million and you should know, the domestic BO is more important for film studios and as is tge case WW more tgan doubled what SP made at the domestic BO. SP had the advantage of being a direct sequel to the successful and popular SF. WW was the first solo female led comic book film in years because "minority" films "don't do well" and it was already shrouded by the toxicicity and negativity the DCEU brand had established for itself, not to mention all the doubt surrounding Gadot's casting and the fact that Paty Jenkins' last directed film was back in 2003. Yet, in the face of all of that SP a film based on a more popular and stronger IP could only outgross WW at the foreign BO by only $200M. Not really impressive.

    Terminator Genysis was crap, the film sucked but where people are excited is the fact that Linda Hamilton is returning and James Cameron is directly involved as a producer on this film, which hasn't been the case since Judgement Day. Quite simply, this is the most meaningful Terminator movie, well, since Judgement Day.

    The other films I mentioned are popular, wildly anticipated and will all be hits to varying degrees...dont even get me started on Frozen 2 and Star Wars; and what that means is, yes, Bond can and will do well but it can kiss any hope of touching a $Billion let alone crossing it goodbye. It's not going to be the BO juggernaut you've convinced and reasoned it to be.
    it doesn't matter who's in front or behind the camera lol .... Actually it does matter.

    You alluded to name talent and tgat's what i was dismissing. Some of the biggest, critically acclaimed and financially viable films are made by and star people who werent and arent necessarily household names. Its all about the talent and quality involved. That's what I was getting at and I think you know that.
    I didn't compare JW AND FF with bond I just said that there sequel earned 300 million less than their previous.

    No. This is what you said..."if universal films can get crappy films like Jurassic world and fast and furious to 1 billion then bond has always been ahead of them..."

    Translation: if such films can make a $Billion then Bond will too. Like I said, that's not how this works.

    Actually despite being a big flop and critically disappointing spectre earned 200 more than ww is quite impressive, The thing you are overlooking that ww is an American film so it is quite obvious that it will earn more than bond domestically just as bond earn highest in UK bring a British film .Not just terminator ww was also a complete crap it was noway near best superhero films. frozen2 won't do as much as the 1st one. I have given much more stats than you did like ticket prices and ex of other films downfall in comparison to bond, I didn't just rely on my opinion. bond 25 is going to be a big $ billion.

    I admire your optimism, no matter how shakey it may be.

    @CraigMooreOHMSS
    don't you just love it when people have future telling devices and "know" everything? :)

    Precognition was one superhuman trait I always wanted, @DarthDimi

    I'm really rather jealous of him.

    @Resurrection, I know you feel that these statistics are a concrete confirmation of what you want or think will happen, but you must understand that audiences change on a dime these days. With the rate that Bond films are coming out now, that puts the series in a trickier position than usual. Casual audiences aren't going to be sure what they're going to get with Craig's last film, from what I've seen.

    It'd be great if Bond made it back into the Billion Dollar club again; I don't think you'll find anyone here who would turn their nose up at such a thing. And sure, we have a lot to bargain with. Another Oscar-winning director, it's Craig's last film, etc.

    But, just because other films do so on a regular basis doesn't mean Bond will, and that is irrespective of their quality. It's got a lot to do with fan-expectation, and I don't think expectations are really negative or sky-rocketing after Spectre. We're kind of in a middling ground at the moment - it's telling that people are talking more about Idris Elba being the next Bond more than they are talking about the next film.

    I think the $650-750 million mark is a realistic expectation at the moment, considering the bargaining chips mentioned above. If the film does turn out to be phenomenal and catch the hearts and minds of people enough to give itself some legs, you could add another $100million to that.

    Stats are nice and they provide interesting discussion, but they provide cold, out-of-context facts about things that need to be contextualised.

    Jurassic World made $1.5Billion because it was a well-marketed return to a franchise that had been dormant for over a decade. For many, it was the first time seeing dinosaurs on the big screen.

    Wonder Woman made lots of money because it had rather incredible word of mouth. You might not have liked it but you're in the minority there. It also had the benefit of being the first universally liked DCEU film, so many fans both die-hard and casual made the most of it. I myself saw it three times.

    So you see, stats are nice and they are important, but to rely on them solely is very unwise.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,409
    @Resurrection
    This is the second time I must ask you to use the edit button and avoid double posts.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Bond isn't the only one who is getting trickier as I said last Jedi / JW fallen kingdom/avengers age of Ultron/fast and furious 8 all were disappointing than the their previous but it fascinates me that you are only able to point out about Craig films and I didn't just stated facts but also pointed out current and 2019 environment especially ticket inflation.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited August 2018 Posts: 40,285
    The fact that we know nothing about this film and people are already deeming the BO a failure is gold. Time to open up the 'Who Will Be The Bond Girl In Bond 53?' Thread I suppose.
Sign In or Register to comment.