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

1131132134136137152

Comments

  • SP US-Canada box office at estimated $199,774,852

    SP generated an estimated $105,000 at the U.S.-Canada box office for the Feb. 19-21 weekend

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?yr=2016&wknd=08&p=.htm

    It's going to be hard, but 200 million are still possible.
    About Craig's tenure, some people are forgeting that QoS and SP have had a better reception by critics and audience than any Brosnan Bond film with the exception of GE.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 1,098
    It looks like Sony are really trying to get SP to reach that $200 mil mark in North America, as the film was given a large theatre count this weekend, as the film was played at 340 sites, an increase of 293 sites. Previous to this the film was at only 47 sites, generating an income of a paltry $2000+ dollars a day, hence no chance of being able to reach $200 mil.
    Even so, $200 mil is still a tough target as the film will need at least another week of this theatre count to have any chance of reaching target.
    This is surely the last dice throw for the film now, as it will surely be pulled from the cinema circuit very soon.

    Film needs approx another $225,000 to reach target.
  • Posts: 1,092
    Stop being so negative, please. It's lame.
  • Posts: 1,098
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Stop being so negative, please. It's lame.

    Its not being lame, its being factual.

    btw:- i'am positive :)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    One has
    to admit, that it did really well in Europe. Thankfully. But since NA is still seen as THE important market, the reception there has done its damage. But - they DID get away with it nevertheless. But I fear for the next.
    jake24 wrote: »
    Spectre is widely viewed as a disappointment in North America. Shame really.

    No offence to North America, but I really don't care what North America thinks of Bond. They hate football, but it's still the biggest sport on the planet. Bond is absolutely capable of surviving poor box office in the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians.
  • // Bond is absolutely capable of surviving poor box office in the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians.///

    $200 million (or almost $200 million) is hardly "poor box office." There were *nine* movies with $200 million in 2015 and SPECTRE came in at No. 10.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Precisely. There is nothing wrong with the N/A box office for SP as far as I'm concerned.

    If peeps wanted another outsize hit like SF (only delivered previously during Connery's heyday) then they were expecting too much it seems.

    N/A matters to a degree because production costs and box office are measured in $. The $ was high last year, so any extra N/A box office counted for a lot more in the grand scheme of things than a butt on a seat anywhere else.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    // Bond is absolutely capable of surviving poor box office in the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians.///

    $200 million (or almost $200 million) is hardly "poor box office." There were *nine* movies with $200 million in 2015 and SPECTRE came in at No. 10.

    I wasn't referring to SP, just Bond in general. People are putting to much weight on the NA Box Office. If they want Bond they can have it, otherwise everyone else will. No biggy.
  • Sometimes, we are not fair with North America. James Bond is a British heroe whith European enemies and European love interests. However, North America is still #1 market for Bond movies. In fact, SP is on 2015 Top 10 there.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Sometimes, we are not fair with North America. James Bond is a British heroe whith European enemies and European love interests. However, North America is still #1 market for Bond movies. In fact, SP is on 2015 Top 10 there.

    Proportionately it's not the no.1 market.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,236
    RC7 wrote: »
    Sometimes, we are not fair with North America. James Bond is a British heroe whith European enemies and European love interests. However, North America is still #1 market for Bond movies. In fact, SP is on 2015 Top 10 there.

    Proportionately it's not the no.1 market.

    Yeah but I think proportionately the UK is the no. 1 market for The Force Awakens so it doesn't make sense to measure it like that.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Bloody hell. Deadpool was made for 58 million and has so far already taken in 492 million with a domestic of 235 million and is an R rated comic book movie....and yet SP struggles to creep to 200 million? See, this is what happens; give the fans what they want and you will be rewarded.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote: »
    No offence to North America, but I really don't care what North America thinks of Bond. They hate football, but it's still the biggest sport on the planet. Bond is absolutely capable of surviving poor box office in the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians.

    Sublime post Sir.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,869
    DPool is one film, not 24 films into a franchise. Have you seen it? I worry it has no where to go from here: the weak plot, flashbacks, jokes (apart from the Hugh Jackman ones) made for today, not tomorrow and the day after...
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    RC7 wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    One has
    to admit, that it did really well in Europe. Thankfully. But since NA is still seen as THE important market, the reception there has done its damage. But - they DID get away with it nevertheless. But I fear for the next.
    jake24 wrote: »
    Spectre is widely viewed as a disappointment in North America. Shame really.

    No offence to North America, but I really don't care what North America thinks of Bond. They hate football, but it's still the biggest sport on the planet. Bond is absolutely capable of surviving poor box office in the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians.
    LOL. None taken.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    peter wrote: »
    DPool is one film, not 24 films into a franchise. Have you seen it? I worry it has no where to go from here: the weak plot, flashbacks, jokes (apart from the Hugh Jackman ones) made for today, not tomorrow and the day after...

    I have seen it but it being one movie as opposed to a 24th is irrelevant. The fact is, it's an R rated movie with Ryan Reynolds who's sort of been a BO pariah the last few years, compared to the usual suspects of Marvel characters DP is pretty obscure in the eyes of the general public and not to mention the character was horrendously realised in Wolverine Origins. A sequel is already being prepared and as a franchise it only needs 2 or 3 movies. No one is expecting 4+ movies. It's done really well and is an example of doing things properly and showing respect and appreciation to the source material without going off on stupid unecessary tangents that just end up killing the film.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,869
    surely Doubleogo you must have seen that, yes, although faithful to its source, as a film it got pretty tired very quickly: flashbacks, exposition, a typical shaved-headed english bloke as the villain.

    RR was charming in the role, but I think the breaking of the fourth wall, the FBs will all be tropes by the time the second film is complete.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see a hard- R rated film make good (although all of its jokes were spoilt in the commercials and trailers, imho; I'm glad you enjoyed it.)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    So Reynolds finally has a hit, huh. Hmm. Perhaps there is hope for the Canadian production which was rumoured to star him. I still won't be seeing it because I expect actors to have some charisma.

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/14582/canadian-production-of-for-your-eyes-only/p1
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,869
    bondjames wrote: »
    So Reynolds finally has a hit, huh. Hmm. Perhaps there is hope for the Canadian production which was rumoured to star him. I still won't be seeing it because I expect actors to have some charisma.

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/551252/#Comment_551252

    I think RR is more appropriate for r-rated humour rather than action-thriller hero (although, his contained thriller, BURIED, was quite good). But, as Bond... no... he hasn't got the charisma. Good guy ( I say this as a Canadian), just not 007... and not even enough to fill the excitement in 007's "little finger...
  • //the nation that perpetuates such cultural demigods as the Kardashians//

    When I hear comments like that, I'm reminded of this clip from The Americanization of Emily.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Haha. That's funny. Nice speech.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    peter wrote: »
    surely Doubleogo you must have seen that, yes, although faithful to its source, as a film it got pretty tired very quickly: flashbacks, exposition, a typical shaved-headed english bloke as the villain.

    RR was charming in the role, but I think the breaking of the fourth wall, the FBs will all be tropes by the time the second film is complete.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see a hard- R rated film make good (although all of its jokes were spoilt in the commercials and trailers, imho; I'm glad you enjoyed it.)

    I agree with you. DP as a character is an acquired taste to begin with and he isn't for everyone. His whole shtick does get old quickly particularly when presented in a movie but my main point was, if movies can adhere closely to what made the source material popular in the first place, it'll please a lot of people and the financial rewards can be reaped; even more so when there isn't a bloated budget.
  • Germanlady wrote: »
    64% is JUST about still positive. Certainly not what we all were aiming for.

    The A- is the only decent number. Sorry. I certainly had wished for something better, mostly for DC's sake. But as it is, the reception was mostly average at best.

    It's a little above average, but it's certainly not the unmitigated disaster that some here are making this out to be. And the fact that a lot of posters have ranked this movie in their top 10 or higher (you wouldn't know it from this thread) shows that this film was still pretty successful from a critical standpoint, at least from a good portion of people who watched it.

  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Yeah, I think Bond 25 will be quite impressive and Craig will finally leave on a high (which unfortunately no Bond actor has in the past).
  • doubleoego wrote: »
    Bloody hell. Deadpool was made for 58 million and has so far already taken in 492 million with a domestic of 235 million and is an R rated comic book movie....and yet SP struggles to creep to 200 million? See, this is what happens; give the fans what they want and you will be rewarded.
    I have watched it and it is not bad, but IMHO it´s still worse than any Craig Bond movie. I can´t understand all that success.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,236
    Yeah, I think Bond 25 will be quite impressive and Craig will finally leave on a high (which unfortunately no Bond actor has in the past).

    George did.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Yeah, I think Bond 25 will be quite impressive and Craig will finally leave on a high (which unfortunately no Bond actor has in the past).

    George did.

    Not really, at the time of his departure, he was basically regarded as "the guy who couldn't replace Connery". But his departure film is the strongest, obviously.
  • Yeah, I think Bond 25 will be quite impressive and Craig will finally leave on a high (which unfortunately no Bond actor has in the past).

    George did.

    Not really, at the time of his departure, he was basically regarded as "the guy who couldn't replace Connery". But his departure film is the strongest, obviously.
    LTK and OHMSS were good movies, but not so successful at their time and just the 2nd and 1st of their actors. I think SP is a much beter farewell movie than DAF, AVTAK and DAD. I ´m afraid the next one may be worse and might ruin Craig´s era, which is sitll the most valued since Connery ´s.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited February 2016 Posts: 1,984
    @ChampionAlonso - Well, commercially speaking, you're right. SP has grossed a lot more than those films, even adjusted for inflation. Critically, it beats DAD and AVTAK, but narrowly falls behind DAF.

    I rank SP above all of those three, however, is this really the type of impact we want Craig to leave behind when he departs from the role? Moore, Dalton and Brosnan kind of had no choice in the matter - Connery basically despised the role by the time he was shooting DAF, and Lazenby was convinced to leave Bond because in that time, perhaps it did seem like Bond would die. Craig has none of those excuses, though. He is given a choice, he doesn't despise the franchise (despite his misinterpreted recent interviews) and Bond has a much more positive outlook now than it did after OHMSS. Craig really doesn't have much of a reason to be leaving it here.

    I'm hoping Craig will crank up something a bit better (and with a stronger sense of direction) for Bond 25 that will merit both commercial and critical success, and that will be a very solid platform for him to depart the franchise with.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    About Craig's tenure, some people are forgeting that QoS and SP have had a better reception by critics and audience than any Brosnan Bond film with the exception of GE.

    True, and SP also grossed considerably more than GE as well. QoS was just behind GE at the box office. Craig's films have generally smashed Brosnan's at box office (his worst performing film to date is hardly behind Brosnan's best) and critically.
Sign In or Register to comment.