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
I think the Bond producers will certainly try to convince Sam hard to come back onboard for Bond 24. Some arguments Babs and Michael can make:
--> When it comes to directing a second Bond film, you must understand you do it for creative reasons.
--> Many directors are afraid of doing a second, because they can't find the creativity for a second. That's wrong. Every Bond film needs a new approach, but every Bond film also needs a familiair approach. It's exactly that what a director can do a second time.
--> Every Bond film is different, but off course within a certain formula. We would love to see you direct a Bond where Bond is doing one hell of a mission....without intense scrutiny of MI6 and M.
--> Apart from the production process of 'Skyfall' being very intense and time consuming, you cannot deny we were one hell of a big family. On top of that, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Ben Whishaw and Danny return. And you can bring Thomas and Roger onboard again as well.
--> We make sure that the next Bond film will premiere in 2015 instead of Sony's wishes of moving forward to a 2014 release. You need to have your time.
--> Lastly, please watch these DVD's. They are documentaries about past director Terence Young and how he found the inspiration for his three films.
Obviously. I last made that point over a week ago. As I said earlier, your list of figures for The Dark Knight Rises proved that would be the case, as if there was any doubt left.
Also, small technicality. I stated "no way" not "NO WAY". I didn't capitalise.
Obviously not and I never made out that I did. The only person was G_G, unless you thought it would blow the roof off too.
I do think $900 million may just be missed out on but I'm not being arrogant about it, just sharing my opinion. If you feel I'm attacking you, really I'm not, not at all.
I call that.....one hell of a skyfall.
Personally I couldn't give two shits whether it surpasses any of these films. I've been a Bond fan my entire life and I've never been interested in B.O. It's the films and the films alone that have enthralled me. I'm amazed and somewhat proud that we've taken Skyfall to our hearts in the UK. However, when the dust settles, B.O. means nothing. It's all about legacy. DAD was massively successful. I'm not comparing SF to it in any way but what I will say is, don't attribute too much value to the film's B.O. It's a mugs game and a sure sign that you value capitalism over creativity.
This is true. It didn'*t have the advantage of being a well known and loved franchise.
Being part of a 50 year long franchise has also got plentiful disadvantages. One of the reasons that the latest Batman films are rated so much higher on IMDB, RT and Metacritic, is very simple to explain really. The fanbase of Nolan's Batman films is more loyal, more new. With James Bond, there are always a bunch of people who will say regardless of the quality of a film "Ughh, I am not gonna watch a Bond film".
So, again, it's not so easy to say 'Inception' had a better box office run.
'Hancock' did something similar too.....I found that box office gross even more 'special'. 'Inception' still could lift one one big name: Christopher Nolan. Even the biggest actors like to play in one of his movies and don't mind that their names are being outperformed by the director's name Christopher Nolan.
Actually, I know a lot of people who really wanted to see Inception as it was the first film Chris Nolan did since The Dark Knight.
He was a HUUUUGGGEEE advantage for the film. Especially after making such an awesome film. A bit like how a lot of the audience for King Kong were people interested in seeing Peter Jackson's first film since the Lord of the Rings, or James Cameron and Titanic/Avatar.
Budget: $150,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend: $62,603,879 (USA) (6 July 2008) (3965 Screens)
Gross: $624,386,746 (Worldwide)
Factoring in advertising and promotional bits, seems pretty successful to me. Film was still bad, though.
Thanks, I was wrong then. I thought the first half was decent, then it went downhill.
The Chinese market has just opened recently for big Hollywood blockbusters. I think it was around 2004 that China's politics gradually allowed foreign blockbusters to enter their market. Usually after big censorship scrutiny (M's line in 'Casino Royale' "Christ, I miss the Cold War" had to be deleted for the Chinese market). And the Chinese have the last say in the final premiere dates.
Having said that, here are some figures that show the Chinese market is quickly becoming very important. 'Casino Royale' was the first ever Bond film to premiere in China and 'The Dark Knight Rises' was the first Batman film to premiere in China. here's a list:
--> 2006 - $ 11.8 K - 'Casino Royale'
--> 2007 - $ 3.0 K - 'The Bourne Ultimatum'
--> 2008 - $ 21.0 K - 'Quantum Of Solace'
--> 2008 - $ 15.1 K - 'Hancock'
--> 2008 - not allowed - 'The Dark Knight' (reasons not given, but Chinese refused 'The Dark Knight')
--> 2010 - $ 68.4 K - 'Inception' (premiered two months after premiere in USA)
--> 2011 - $101.2 K - 'Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol' (premiered 6 weeks after premiere in USA)
--> 2012 - $ 52.8 K - 'The Dark Knight Rises' (premiered one month after premiere in USA)
--> 2012 - $ 16.1 K - 'The Bourne Legacy'
--> 2012 - not opened yet - 'Taken 2'
As you can see, the market in China is only just opening up. Delays, initiated by the state run censorship board in China, usually don't have much influence. For the Chinese audience franchises like Batman and Bond are as new to them as Volkswagen.
Having said that, I think 'Skyfall' will earn past $ 100 K in China. Quite easily. Especially when you take into account that 'M:I - Ghost Protocol' did a lot better than 'TDKR'. Andd.....'Skyfall' was partially filmed in China as well.
6000.000 tickets sold is a sure bet.
UPDATED- TICKETS SOLD IN FRANCE FROM DR NO - SKYFALL
DN 4,772,574
FRWL 5,623,391
GF 6,675,099 - the most tickets sold!
TB 5,734,842
YOLT 4,489,249
OHMSS 1,958,172 - a huge drop from the Connery films!
DAF 2,493,739 - Connery's least succesful
LALD 3,053,913
TMWTGG 2,873,898
TSWLM 3,500,993 - Roger Moore's most succesful in FRANCE
MR 3,171,274
FYEO 3,181,840
OP 2,944,481
AVTAK 2,423,306 - Roger's least succesful - A huge decline since TSWLM
TLD 1,955,471 - The lowest number of tickets sold!...Poor Timothy!
LTK 2,093,006
GE 3,489,833 - A huge leap after 6 years off the screen...
TND n/a
TWINE 3,406,691
DAD 3,996,123
CR 3,149,946
QOS 3,709,535
SF - 5,722,000
SF is only 12,843 from outselling THUNDERBALL!!!...
SF now the 3rd most succesful BOND FILM after GF and TB...!
If we think of how Criag has to step into some big shoes to fill following the Brosnan age. I was never a fan of PB or his moviesw (except GE) but he was a beloved Bond and has many fans. I am reminded of the hate that DC received when it was announced that he was the new Bond. It was reminscent of the hate that GL received having to replace HRH Sean Connery.
DC is a supreb actor, Purvis and Wade got their shytt together, Mendes is a top notch director and the casting department was on their game as well. DC has some great chemistry with both Naomi and Berenice. Jarvier played Silva suprebly. The whole cast including, Fiennes, the geek playing Q were all up for this one.
But to some others who were very optimistic, you were pretty harsh in trying to bring them "down to earth". And since, in the end, their predictions "done with the heart, not the mind", were better than yours, maybe you should apology to some :)
What I call arrogant is well, the "no way" about all the foreign markets, and also some comment like
"No Bond film has made more than $426,793,106 internationally. So work it out.
$600 million is too much of a leap."
Well, as they say, past performance does not necessarily predict future results...
Good point, although who knows how accurate that 200 million figure is? Has there been an official validation of it, or was it just an industry guess?
Also, I think in the Empire podcast interview the writers said that the film didn't actually earn money from product placement at all, but rather co-promotions: ie if there is a product in the film, that brand have tie-in ads which effectively give the film millions more value of promotion.