It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
This.
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.
Lol Bond 25 won't be earning $1.anything Billion. It'll be lucky to cross $800Million.
Observe the landscape.
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.
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.
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.
Actually they do.
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.
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.
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.
Lion King will make no less than $900M. It's 100% going to walk all over and trounce Bond 25 at the BO.
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.
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.
Wow.
@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
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.
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.
This is the second time I must ask you to use the edit button and avoid double posts.