SPECTRE: It grossed $880 Million Worldwide (..and 2015 was the biggest box office year so far)

1114115117119120152

Comments

  • Posts: 1,098
    UK latest BO update for SP

    Well the film took a big beating this weekend in the UK, and only grossed £295,000 for a running total of £92.8 mil. It was speculated, that SP needs to rebound a bit over the Xmas hols if it is going to have a chance of beating 'Avatar's' £94 mil.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Nobody ever answered the second and more interesting question-was 2015 the biggest movie year ever?

    I would say no, I was a bit carried away by all the hype beforehand, but it really wasn t any more spectacular than a lot of other years before.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    Spectre could never have hoped to do something like SW but either way, this SW thing is crazy. Half a billion in less than a week? :D Well, I sure hope it dethrones Avatar, but that's besides the point. ;-)

    Spectre is a successful film, no argument there. Getting passed that 800 mil bar is an achievement in and by itself. Perhaps SF was a freak accident, a wild exception but not the new trend.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,516
    Seems that 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' exceeded estimates and now holds the record for the biggest worldwide opening weekend of all time for a film.
  • Posts: 1,098
    Nobody ever answered the second and more interesting question-was 2015 the biggest movie year ever?

    I would say no, I was a bit carried away by all the hype beforehand, but it really wasn t any more spectacular than a lot of other years before.

    Because the answer is not known yet, but with the stunning success of SW7, it is predicted that 2015 could be a record year in N.America with receipts reaching $11 bill.

  • mepal1 wrote: »
    UK latest BO update for SP

    Well the film took a big beating this weekend in the UK, and only grossed £295,000 for a running total of £92.8 mil. It was speculated, that SP needs to rebound a bit over the Xmas hols if it is going to have a chance of beating 'Avatar's' £94 mil.

    Surely Spectre has actually sold more tickets than Avatar at this point, though. Pretty much everyone paid the inflated 3D price for Avatar.
  • Posts: 1,098
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    UK latest BO update for SP

    Well the film took a big beating this weekend in the UK, and only grossed £295,000 for a running total of £92.8 mil. It was speculated, that SP needs to rebound a bit over the Xmas hols if it is going to have a chance of beating 'Avatar's' £94 mil.

    Surely Spectre has actually sold more tickets than Avatar at this point, though. Pretty much everyone paid the inflated 3D price for Avatar.

    Umm, thing is you could say that the 2D ticket prices of 2015, could be on a par or more than what 3D tickets cost in 2009.
    Anyway, UK box office goes by gross and not admissions, pity its not both.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited December 2015 Posts: 28,694
    ggl007 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I think it's extreme that anyone is getting mad about the box office returns in general.

    A Bond movie that is #10 in the US, #5 in the overseas box office, that is well above those that follows, but that is well below the Star Wars movie above :

    This is Spectre ? "Box office success, everyone should be happy !"

    This is The Spy Who Loved Me ? "Bond had its low point with Moore, what did they have in mind ?".

    May SPECTRE's box office make some realize the 80s were definitely not as bad as the "US inflation adjusted figures" make it look in a too simplistic manner (the "adjusment" is just a rule of three computation...).

    And well, TSWLM's BO was probably about 10 times its budget :)

    Did anyone understand anything in this post?

    No and its even more sad, that GG finally left because of him. Evetything GG contributed was of so much more value.

    Time to write him again! ;)

    So he was written, and not a real person? Who wrote him?

    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)


    =))
  • Posts: 1,310
    I don't think Spectre can hit $200m in the US anymore.
  • Posts: 6,601
    chrisisall wrote: »
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)


    =))

    :D
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    writer5150 wrote: »
    I know this is a bit late, but was reading the comparisons of the Craig films to the Brosnan tones. I don't think anybody here in the U.S. thinks of Brosnan as a Malibu resident or even American. From what I've gathered, Craig is much more popular. In my opinion (hold the dogs until i finish), the Brosnan films were simply much more enjoyable. What they lacked (sometimes seriously) in good scripting was generally made up for in fun. The Craig movies are not fun. They're typically dark and brooding. CR gets a pass on this because it's a fantastic film. It's not fun, but it's a really well-done movie -- one of the best Bond films. The other Craig films have just as many (for QOS even more) scripting issues. And they're not fun to watch. When I see a Connery or Moore or Brosnan film on TV, I stop and watch. (Except DAD when Bond goes parasailing -- I can never watch that. Never. Ever. No sir.) When I see a Craig film, my eyes linger for a few moments and I'm off to do something else -- unless it's any of the key scenes in CR (construction sequence, airport sequence, gambling sequence, Bond in M's apartment, or the torture sequence).

    I was really hoping that SP would retain the idea of elevating the quality of the Bond films while re-discovering the fun that was lost. The closest we've had to the old glory was the initial conversation with Silva. SP did not deliver, though the opening sequence was beautiful.

    BTW... noticed everyone brings up the invisible car all the time with DAD. Yeah, a bit much, but it is based on existing technology. As was the underwater city in TSWLM (I think the existing one is in Japan) ... and the invisible car is no more outrageous than the rocket that can land and re-launch into space (from a volcano!) in YOLT. That was decades before the shuttle. ;)

    Now you can release the hounds.

    Yes look on YouTube for the invisible car that Mercedes developed.

    I think TopGear came up with a somewhat less successful attempt as well.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 2,015
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)
    You should rather use the username of someone who actually left the forum and deleted all his messages because of well.. no need to talk about it again.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Nobody ever answered the second and more interesting question-was 2015 the biggest movie year ever?

    I would say no, I was a bit carried away by all the hype beforehand, but it really wasn t any more spectacular than a lot of other years before.

    Because the answer is not known yet, but with the stunning success of SW7, it is predicted that 2015 could be a record year in N.America with receipts reaching $11 bill.

    I wasn t talking BO. I am not an accountant, and the subject doesn t interest me much, unless there are records involved.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)
    You should rather use the username of someone who actually left the forum and deleted all his messages because of well.. no need to talk about it again.

    If only we could be so lucky as to experience that again, but with another party entirely this time.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Nobody ever answered the second and more interesting question-was 2015 the biggest movie year ever?

    I would say no, I was a bit carried away by all the hype beforehand, but it really wasn t any more spectacular than a lot of other years before.

    Because the answer is not known yet, but with the stunning success of SW7, it is predicted that 2015 could be a record year in N.America with receipts reaching $11 bill.

    I wasn t talking BO. I am not an accountant, and the subject doesn t interest me much, unless there are records involved.
    There have been a few standouts for me personally (SW7, MM-FR, MI-RN, The Martian, Sicario) but overall creatively, no, it has disappointed more than it has impressed, given all the hype. Same for that other 'blockbuster year', namely 1989.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 389
    SP is still making money this week in North America: 350k on Monday, for a 194.25 cume, a 200 million BO is still possible.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,516
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)
    You should rather use the username of someone who actually left the forum and deleted all his messages because of well.. no need to talk about it again.

    You're right, there's no need to talk about it again. Yet for some reason, that's exactly what you choose to do, time and time again. Odd, that.

    Anyway, realized today that SP is playing nowhere near me in cinemas, which is a shame because I was hoping to catch it one last time before cinemas. Anyone else notice its disappearance? Didn't think it'd be gone already, but then again, it has been out for a month and a half or so here in the States.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It was me, the author of all @Suivez_ce_parachute's pain. >:)
    You should rather use the username of someone who actually left the forum and deleted all his messages because of well.. no need to talk about it again.

    You're right, there's no need to talk about it again. Yet for some reason, that's exactly what you choose to do, time and time again. Odd, that.

    Anyway, realized today that SP is playing nowhere near me in cinemas, which is a shame because I was hoping to catch it one last time before cinemas. Anyone else notice its disappearance? Didn't think it'd be gone already, but then again, it has been out for a month and a half or so here in the States.
    Most theatres near me are playing several showings of SP daily.
  • Posts: 1,631
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Anyone else notice its disappearance?

    I'm actually surprised that it's still playing at several theaters in my area. A few weeks ago, when I was looking at the listings to figure out when I'd finally make it to the cinema for my first viewing of the film, it kind of seemed like it was starting its wind down, with only three showings per theater a day, and with Star Wars: The Force Awakens looming on the horizon, I thought that it would bow out of theaters when that film arrived.

    Just checked the listings a few minutes ago and it's still going fairly strong in theaters around me. I can't imagine that it'll last more than another week, though.
  • edited December 2015 Posts: 2,015
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    You're right, there's no need to talk about it again. Yet for some reason, that's exactly what you choose to do, time and time again. Odd, that.

    It's the first time I wrote about haserot IIRC, who is IMO the one who suffered actually here (deleting one's comments is not a little thing to do). And I did this only because my username was written out of the blue here... Some people should expect some replies when they write other people's usernames. Notice the one who wrote my username didn't do it the second time and then I didn't reply ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,516
    Doesn't matter if it's about @haserot, it's the fact that you've singled out other members since the "exodus," of sorts, took place a couple of weeks ago. It's not needed.

    I must say I'm jealous of those who still have the chance to see it, then! I feel like the theaters around me have dropped it, just so they have more room for 'The Force Awakens.' I also figured out why I couldn't find showtimes for 'The Revenant' for the longest time: it's not out on Christmas like I thought. :(
  • Posts: 1,098
    SP still playing at my local cinema in the UK, but with just one evening screening, and its still selling tickets in advance.
    No surprise, that SW7 is nearly a sellout for its screenings here.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2015 Posts: 23,883
    The Revenant is a Jan 8th wide release. I'll be in NYC then and will try to catch it while I'm there - it looks absolutely incredible from the trailers.


    I want to see the Big Short and Joy before New Year.
  • mepal1 wrote: »
    From what i've read the official box office figures quoted, are based on the films initial run, and don't include all the minor re-releases and double bills, that the film may have had.

    Oh btw I forgot a IMO good example : OHMSS.
    If you look at the BO of its year, no problem OHMSS did fine, didn't it ?
    But if you listen to what Michael G. Wilson says, OHMSS took "a long time" before making any profit.

    If you consider the BO of OHMSS' year only includes the inital run, you're left to wonder why Michael G Wilson says this.
    If you consider it includes the initial run and then the minor re-releases and so on, it's less weird.

    And well, at least for DN and FRWL, we're talking about re-release that possibly brought more BO than the initial run. Quite exceptional, even Star Wars re-releases "only" brought in about 30% more...
  • Posts: 1,098
    I remember Cubby.B once said that it was rubbish what the media had said about OHMSS being a flop, as he stated the film actually made a profit of $38 mil, which would be decent now, but in those days would of been a very healthy profit.
  • mepal1 wrote: »
    I remember Cubby.B once said that it was rubbish what the media had said about OHMSS being a flop, as he stated the film actually made a profit of $38 mil, which would be decent now, but in those days would of been a very healthy profit.

    Did you know in France OHMSS is the lowest of all the Bond movies as far as the number of viewers counted in the box office lists is concerned ? Dalton's 2 movies came very close to it, but OHMSS still has the "wrong record".

    Although to be fair, France had more population in the end of the 80s than in 69, so you can also consider Dalton's the low point here...

    All the 21 other Bonds are one step ahead at least.


  • Posts: 725
    SP is still making money this week in North America: 350k on Monday, for a 194.25 cume, a 200 million BO is still possible.

    True. It's a shame it didn't open a week or two sooner. It would have very likely made it past 200m, now it is doable, but not easy. Getting it's theaters soaked up by SW was bad enough but 5 more films are opening Christmas Day and they will take another big bite out of the theater counts of all the films like SP that have been out a while. Christmas and New Years will help if there are enough theaters left. Funny how 200m sounds lots batter than 198m. The opening date was an issue in the leaked emails that the suits at Sony were right about.

  • Posts: 1,098
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I remember Cubby.B once said that it was rubbish what the media had said about OHMSS being a flop, as he stated the film actually made a profit of $38 mil, which would be decent now, but in those days would of been a very healthy profit.

    Did you know in France OHMSS is the lowest of all the Bond movies as far as the number of viewers counted in the box office lists is concerned ? Dalton's 2 movies came very close to it, but OHMSS still has the "wrong record".

    Although to be fair, France had more population in the end of the 80s than in 69, so you can also consider Dalton's the low point here...

    All the 21 other Bonds are one step ahead at least.


    Do you have a list of the admissions in France for Bond films, that you could post for us here?

  • edited December 2015 Posts: 2,015
    smitty wrote: »
    True. It's a shame it didn't open a week or two sooner.
    It's one of the "funny" part of the leaks : the Sony executives mailing to one another "I was told you was ok with it" "I hate we lose the Skyfall dates" "X told me you had agree" "Y said they would wait for Mendes even if it meant loosing these dates" etc...

    In the end the "Skyfall date" team won, it seems.

    At one moment (Oct 2014), they also tried to have the 3rd of October (2015) release date.
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Do you have a list of the admissions in France for Bond films, that you could post for us here?

    1. SF : 7M
    2. GF : 6,7M
    3. TB: 5,7M
    4. FRWL : 5,6M
    5. DN : 4,8M
    6. YOLT : 4,5M
    7. DAD : 4M
    8. QOS : 3,7M
    9. TWINE : 3,6M
    10. TND : 3,6M
    11. TSWLM : 3,5M
    12. GE : 3,5M
    13. CR : 3,2M
    14. FYEO: 3,2M
    15. MR : 3,2M
    16. LALD : 3,1M
    17. OP : 2,9M
    18. TMWTGG : 2,9M
    19. DAF: 2,5M
    20. AVTAK: 2,4M
    21. LTK : 2,1M
    22. TLD : 2M
    23. OHMSS : 1,9M

    SP should do around 4,5M
    NSNA had 2,6M
    CR67 did 1,7M

    But as I said many times, beware of too much comparison between years (and well, the populatio of France went up 30% since the 60s !). BO is also a lot about competition (SF benefited from the Asterix "flop", Moore had French action movies still quite strong at that time, etc)


Sign In or Register to comment.