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

12467172

Comments

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    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

    Disappointing for whom? They all still cracked a billion and brought in major returns after following on from a film that had serious novelty or a huge advantage. Now more than ever, I'm convinced that you haven't a clue what you're actually talking about. The Last Jedi followed on from the first Star Wars film in a decade. Fallen Kingdom was the sequel to the first Jurassic film in 14 years. Both respective predecessors had MASSIVE hype. Age of Ultron just wasn't as good as The Avengers. Fast 8 followed on from a film that got a major financial boost due to a tragedy. This is exactly what I mean by contextualising your figures rather than just observing cold numbers and actually understanding what caused them to inflate and drop back down.
     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.

    Well, eh, yeah. He is the current Bond, after all. It's not exactly fair to compare his box-office to that of Brosnan, or Moore, or anyone else.

    I'm expecting Bond 25 to do very well. People will undoubtedly turn up in droves to see Craig off. But the logic you're applying here is very questionable - you're mixing up personal opinion and facts.

    Welcome to the boards, by the way.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited August 2018 Posts: 7,926
    Age of Ultron, Fallen Kingdom and Fate of the furious were mark downs on their previous installments, but they were still massive hits, raking in around 5 to 6 times their budgets back. I don't think it has ever been truly determined how much money was spent on SP (some estimates exceed 300 million) but I heard that the movie need to make 650 - 750 before it made its money back, including marketing, excetera. And after that whatever profit was made was split across mulitple parties. Yes, SP was a financial success, but I don't think anywhere near on the scale of those three films you mentioned. Fallen Kingdom had a budget of 170 million and grossed around 1.25 billion, whereas SP had a budget around 250 - 300 million and grossed only 880 million, so it's not a realistic comparison. Sorry, no offence, but I don't see Bond as that kind of franchise that does mega numbers, only SF really qualifies in that category.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,883
    Aren't ticket sales on their own a clearer measure of success and popularity.

    Considering production costs is interesting, but that's really more the concern of the filmmakers and producers. Their balance sheet isn't so much my concern.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,285
    Box office should only ever be a concern to audiences if it involves a film in a particular series/trilogy/what have you that you'll want to see more of in the future.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Box office should only ever be a concern to audiences if it involves a film in a particular series/trilogy/what have you that you'll want to see more of in the future.

    Absolutely. It's always enlightening to delve into where the money is being spent, of course. Thankfully, the future of Bond hasn't ever really been in jeopardy because of low box-office.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,285
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Box office should only ever be a concern to audiences if it involves a film in a particular series/trilogy/what have you that you'll want to see more of in the future.

    Absolutely. It's always enlightening to delve into where the money is being spent, of course. Thankfully, the future of Bond hasn't ever really been in jeopardy because of low box-office.

    Indeed, but at the same time it wouldn't hurt for them to trim that budget. Spending $300 million + on one film is ridiculously too much, and it guarantees that you're going to need a huge box office success to warrant the price that was paid.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    Agreed, @Creasy47

    I honestly don't know how any Bond film could warrant being north of $180 Million, especially with Mission: Impossible - Fallout costing roughly that amount with all of its insanity.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.Get your facts straight About the budget.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,285
    @Resurrection, happy to have new members here but other mods have told you numerous times now to stop with the double/triple/quadruple posts. If you have another thought to add to your comment that's the latest in a thread, simply edit the comment and add the information. This will be the last friendly.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.Get your facts straight About the budget.

    Thanks for the figures. I can use IMDb too. The $245 million is a production budget figure, which more often than not does not include money spent on marketing. The figure you provided for The Last Jedi is an approximate figure which some have included marketing costs in and some haven't.

    Anyway, I'm bored arguing about numbers for a film that won't have to worry about them - you're not going to make too many friends around here with that kind of dickish attitude.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,926
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.Get your facts straight About the budget.

    But my point is that 300 million represents a much smaller percentage overall, because Force Awakens made 2 billion, and Jurassic World made 1.65 billion. I think Furious 7 made 1.5 billion also. So the percentage drop is not as steep, even if the amount is the same.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.Get your facts straight About the budget.

    Thanks for the figures. I can use IMDb too. The $245 million is a production budget figure, which more often than not does not include money spent on marketing. The figure you provided for The Last Jedi is an approximate figure which some have included marketing costs in and some haven't.

    Anyway, I'm bored arguing about numbers for a film that won't have to worry about them - you're not going to make too many friends around here with that kind of dickish attitude.

    Right the guy who ends his comment with dickish is going to be a Friend , I would rather have not...the last Jedi marketing budget was much higher which wasn't include in it.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Agreed, @Creasy47

    I honestly don't know how any Bond film could warrant being north of $180 Million, especially with Mission: Impossible - Fallout costing roughly that amount with all of its insanity.

    Spectre day of the dead festival alone cost 40 million, clothes/cars/planes/chopper/ and other props, Spectre set in Sahara desert, explosion made a Guinness record,
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.Get your facts straight About the budget.

    But my point is that 300 million represents a much smaller percentage overall, because Force Awakens made 2 billion, and Jurassic World made 1.65 billion. I think Furious 7 made 1.5 billion also. So the percentage drop is not as steep, even if the amount is the same.

    I didn't say 300 Million about those 3 films but their sequel after them just as Spectre after skyfall
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,995
    Agreed, @Creasy47

    I honestly don't know how any Bond film could warrant being north of $180 Million, especially with Mission: Impossible - Fallout costing roughly that amount with all of its insanity.

    Spectre day of the dead festival alone cost 40 million, clothes/cars/planes/chopper/ and other props, Spectre set in Sahara desert, explosion made a Guinness record,

    You know what, I don't think anyone has ever mentioned that before! Thanks for the info.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Aren't ticket sales on their own a clearer measure of success and popularity.

    Considering production costs is interesting, but that's really more the concern of the filmmakers and producers. Their balance sheet isn't so much my concern.

    My thoughts exactly, how much tickets have been sale and inflation as well
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2018 Posts: 11,139
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.
    Get your facts straight About the budget.

    That's rich coming from you.

    Purely accounting for the theatrical BO alone:

    (245×2)+150=640

    That 640 = SP's breakeven point in which the profit of 240 is now divided up amongst theatres, Sony, MGM and EoN.

    Earned more than thrice it's budget you say? That's some impressive alternative calculating you've got going on.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    Age of Ultron, Fallen Kingdom and Fate of the furious were mark downs on their previous installments, but they were still massive hits, raking in around 5 to 6 times their budgets back. I don't think it has ever been truly determined how much money was spent on SP (some estimates exceed 300 million) but I heard that the movie need to make 650 - 750 before it made its money back, including marketing, excetera. And after that whatever profit was made was split across mulitple parties. Yes, SP was a financial success, but I don't think anywhere near on the scale of those three films you mentioned. Fallen Kingdom had a budget of 170 million and grossed around 1.25 billion, whereas SP had a budget around 250 - 300 million and grossed only 880 million, so it's not a realistic comparison. Sorry, no offence, but I don't see Bond as that kind of franchise that does mega numbers, only SF really qualifies in that category.

    Skyfall earned 5 -6 times of it's budget just the like the rest of them and Spectre earned 3-4 times of it's budget just as the rest of them.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Age of Ultron, Fallen Kingdom and Fate of the furious were mark downs on their previous installments, but they were still massive hits, raking in around 5 to 6 times their budgets back. I don't think it has ever been truly determined how much money was spent on SP (some estimates exceed 300 million) but I heard that the movie need to make 650 - 750 before it made its money back, including marketing, excetera. And after that whatever profit was made was split across mulitple parties. Yes, SP was a financial success, but I don't think anywhere near on the scale of those three films you mentioned. Fallen Kingdom had a budget of 170 million and grossed around 1.25 billion, whereas SP had a budget around 250 - 300 million and grossed only 880 million, so it's not a realistic comparison. Sorry, no offence, but I don't see Bond as that kind of franchise that does mega numbers, only SF really qualifies in that category.

    Skyfall earned 5 -6 times of it's budget just the like the rest of them and Spectre earned 3-4 times of it's budget just as the rest of them.

    Again, you don't know what you're talking about. Learn to take correction.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Agreed, @Creasy47

    I honestly don't know how any Bond film could warrant being north of $180 Million, especially with Mission: Impossible - Fallout costing roughly that amount with all of its insanity.

    Spectre day of the dead festival alone cost 40 million, clothes/cars/planes/chopper/ and other props, Spectre set in Sahara desert, explosion made a Guinness record,

    You know what, I don't think anyone has ever mentioned that before! Thanks for the info.
    . Welcome
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.
    Get your facts straight About the budget.

    That's rich coming from you.

    Purely accounting for the theatrical BO alone:

    (245×2)+150=640

    That 640 = SP's breakeven point in which the profit of 240 is now divided up amongst theatres, Sony, MGM and EoN.

    Earned more than thrice it's budget you say? That's some impressive alternative calculating you've got going on.

    Didn't understand about 640 ? Please elaborate
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.
    Get your facts straight About the budget.

    That's rich coming from you.

    Purely accounting for the theatrical BO alone:

    (245×2)+150=640

    That 640 = SP's breakeven point in which the profit of 240 is now divided up amongst theatres, Sony, MGM and EoN.

    Earned more than thrice it's budget you say? That's some impressive alternative calculating you've got going on.

    Didn't understand about 640 ? Please elaborate

    For a film to break even it needs to double it's production budget and add a seperate marketing budget to it. A film of this size usually has a marketing budget of anywhere between $150M and $200M.

    You've been confusing revenue with profit.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited August 2018 Posts: 2,541
    doubleoego wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Disappointing for all of people that's why they earned much lesser than the first one. Fallen kingdom earned 300 lesser than the first one just as Spectre , make another Jurassic world and it will earn close 900 just as Spectre. The last Jedi earned 800 million lesser than the 2015 one with an budget of 317 million . Fast and furious earned 1.2 billion, 300 million lesser than the first one with the budget of 250 million. Spectre budget was 245 million earned 880 million more than thrice of budget just as others.
    Get your facts straight About the budget.

    That's rich coming from you.

    Purely accounting for the theatrical BO alone:

    (245×2)+150=640

    That 640 = SP's breakeven point in which the profit of 240 is now divided up amongst theatres, Sony, MGM and EoN.

    Earned more than thrice it's budget you say? That's some impressive alternative calculating you've got going on.

    Didn't understand about 640 ? Please elaborate

    For a film to break even it needs to double it's production budget and add a seperate marketing budget to it. A film of this size usually has a marketing budget of anywhere between $150M and $200M.

    You've been confusing revenue with profit.

    Lol 200 million for marketing budget of Spectre .... skyfall production budget was 200 million
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    And?
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    doubleoego wrote: »
    And?

    Spectre promotional and marketing budget was 100 million which was shared by heinken(33%)/Aston Martin/Mexico governor gave 20 million to eon production.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    See it for yourself in the link and check other sources as well
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Infinity war production /marketing and promotional budget cost more than 500 million and it earned 2 billion 4 times of it's budget
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Box office should only ever be a concern to audiences if it involves a film in a particular series/trilogy/what have you that you'll want to see more of in the future.

    Absolutely. It's always enlightening to delve into where the money is being spent, of course. Thankfully, the future of Bond hasn't ever really been in jeopardy because of low box-office.

    Indeed, but at the same time it wouldn't hurt for them to trim that budget. Spending $300 million + on one film is ridiculously too much, and it guarantees that you're going to need a huge box office success to warrant the price that was paid.

    Especially when you get the impression that the movie had a lower budget. 1/3 of the score was pretty much rehashed from the previous film, whereas the car chase felt empty and very underwhelming (when I drove to Rome there were cars everywhere), the ending of the movie was shoehorned because the setpiece for the fallen helicopter had already been built and they did not want to waste more money. Most of the budget was pretty much spent on the PTS and the guiness world record explosion no one cared about.

    Previous Bond films also proved that you can make a masterpiece with a lower budget as long as you've got a good script and a director who understands Bond.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Whatever. There are reports stating SP's production budget is $245M and others saying $300M.

    The marketing budget being $100M or $150M or even $200M doesn't make a difference to the overall principle of how profit is determined and the numbers ultimately are still within the same ballpark figure, give or take $50M.

    Lastly, it doesn't matter who's footing the bill. Various brands pay for product placement to help finance these films but guess what, they all fall under the PRODUCTION/MARKETING BUDGET which the film expects to see enough returns on to generate a PROFIT. Ideally a sizable one.

Sign In or Register to comment.