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
Bond: "The Junkanoo is in Nassau dear fellar, not your beloved Gotham City"
Batman: "Yeah, well...ahhhh....ummm...ahhh...well, but you see it-ahhh....
...
....
.....
......
.......
........
.........
..........
....Nicely played..."
I do. 'Transformers' needs 3D glasses to help it way across the 1 Billion Dollar mark :-). I think there are also not too many 'good' films in that list.
Some awful films have passed a billion like half at least of all films that have passed a billion.
I'll spare mepal1 some work...
Well, the figure that is "available" to you comes from a French company (and NOT from BoxOfficeMojo, oh the irony), so as a French allow me to give another "authoritative" figure. All the data below is public and available if you want to look for it (but there are a lot of denial here on this topic :) ).
The basis of all that has been written is this paper :
http://za.omg.yahoo.com/news/james-bond-saga-numbers-sean-connerys-golden-touch-044800722.html
A simple way to prove these rankings are meaningless is simply to use another currency (remember that $ is only for less than a third of SF's box office).
Take Pounds for instance (about 20% of SF box office).
Thunderbal did 50M£ wolrdwide in 1965
If you ask a inflation calcutor how much pounds it makes after inflation adjustment :
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html#axzz2JsYfvGNQ
It tells 800M£ (I round up, it's so ridiculous to claim to have 0.00001% accuracy on a $1bn number...)
SF worldwide has currently less than 700M£.
So there you are a "proof" SF has yet to beat TB, by a more than 10% margin than China's last weeks will not give. To me it is a meaningless proof, but if on the other hand you think the AFP method is sound and meaningful, then I challenge you to explain me why the same method with another currency won't be as sound.. and yet gives an opposite result.
To use Euro is more difficult, because of the the fact it's a mix of older currencies. It's about as much as the $ for SF box office now, though...
If I use Franc as the inflation framework as an estimate for the computations for the euro, I find that TB "beats" SF by an even larger margin (930M€ for TB, while SF has 800M€).
Now if we mix $, Euro, and Pounds, you have almost 3/4 of the box office of SF, and a back of envelope computation tells me SF needs to do about 10% more of what it has to hope to be near TB (but the computation is still meaningless IMO).
Remember, this is not doing manipulations with "TB had no Russia, China, Eastern Europe, etc...", it's simply using the exact same method as the AFP-Relaxnews list everyone's quoting for weeks, but with other currencies. And a list that keeps on changing depending on the currency you use is quite meaningless, IMO...
The above is the reason why you won't find "inflation adjusted worldwide box office" lists for movies, even on a site for rankings aficionados like Box Office Mojo. So why did this French company dared to do one and is now a reference for every one here ? Well, a hint : that's the only "list" they have ever done I think :) Now it has been quoted and copy/pasted by many on the Internet, so you feel you've read it "everywhere on sites you trust for years", but no, that's a one-hit wonder from a journalist you never heard before... and probably a French one :)
I won't venture into economics, but well, the $ is going down with respect to many other currencies for quite some years now (for Yuan, yearly speaking, it has only been going down since the creation of the exchange rate...), so using it as the main currency simply favors a lot the importance of "Overseas" box office in the later years. Expect "Overseas" hits in the near future to basically wipe out the past records if the trend continues.
Even when you follow BoxOffice week by week Overseas report, keep in mind that the value of the $ with respect to the currencies of overseas can be realistically changed up to 2% each day. So don't read too much when "$3M more in the week end" appears in the final sum, it could be only exchange rate effect.
Now now 'Gustav'........behave yourself!......or i will post my updated list!........ok?
btw:- in your countries list of top BO performers for 'SF' ...i would like to add 'Switzerland'.
Last time i looked the film had earned over $20 mil there.
I know its not on your list, probably because BO Mojo dont have a reliable Swiss BO contact, as they told me themselves.........but international figures are available' from 'screen daily', only if you know how to get around their registration process to access this data..........oops!
:)
Anyway, forget 'Batman'. What i want to know is how that bleedin film 'Avatar' did so well...i know the 3D SFX were very good, but the story was so so, and it had blue coloured people in the film..............wtf!
ps: thanks 'Suivez', for your contribution to the BO subject, as i have been saying to members here, to get a fair comparison, one needs to look at various sources of inflation calculation methods........but for some strange reason...some members here only want to pick a list which shows all the previous Bond films in a poor way...........i wonder why??? :)
I belive this must be the latest list:
1. $1,093,544,126 - Skyfall
2. $1,037,291,060.32 - Thunderball
3. $932,346,267.74 - Goldfinger
4. $843,280,463.96 - Live And Let Die
5. $773,204,227.54 - You Only Live Twice
6. $707,967,950.50 - The Spy Who Loved Me
7. $687,348,781.40 - Casino Royale
8. $670,341,133.13 - Moonraker
9. $662,795,358.02 - Diamonds Are Forever
10. $629,928,504.77 - Quantum Of Solace
11. $596,667,068.63 - From Russia With Love
12. $555,648,360.42 - Die Another Day
13. $534,777,984.42 - GoldenEye
14. $517,040,163.49 - On Her Majesty's Secret Service
15. $502,584,334.85 - The World Is Not Enough
16. $497,181,376.24 - For Your Eyes Only
17. $480,131,415.66 - Tomorrow Never Dies
18. $458,120,146.04 - The Man With The Golden Gun
19. $456,431,419.48 - Dr. No
20. $435,630,647.59 - Octopussy
21. $389,480,795.77 - The Living Daylights
22. $339,368,258.36 - A View To A Kill
23. $291,436,616.45 - Licence To Kill
For reference 'SF' has now overtaken 'GF', quite an achievement.
As 'Samuel001' has pointed out.....if 'SF' can hang on well in China, then the film can possibly even top this list.......you never know!
Sorry 'Mr Bond', but i have just adjusted the top 3 places for you in the list, according to taking the 'cogerson' method, which you will find is the 'mean' of the 3 main lists published on the internet.
1. $1,127,900,00 - Thunderball
2. $1,093,544,126 - Skyfall
3. $1,082,300,00 - Goldfinger
I have looked at the available data : TDKR was 6 weeks there. Bourne was 5 weeks there. Taken 2 5 weeks also. And that's only a few I looked at. I know BoxOfficeMojo almost always stop their China box office tracking at the first 4 weeks, but there are definitely Hollywood movies released for longer period, and that looks like the norm actually. Do you have info Skyfall will be there only 4 weeks really ?
Some BO resources do stop tracking films once they fall out of the 10.
If it matters, they were calculated for 2012.
Moreover, taking the mean/average from three sources of inflation corrected box office grosses is NOT necessarily more accurate. It could become even more inaccurate. The only thing you need to know on which institution or what year the inflation calculations are based on. And then.....you simply MENTION this as a source.
Problem solved and you don't need to prove that I am wrong....or perhaps even right. As a matter of fact, I don't give a bloody damn :-). Fact is, and I find that truly unbelievable, that certain people stay in the negative comfort zone, even after the $1.1 Billion Dollar milestone has been reached ( @mepal1, @Suivez_ce_parachute, @htall90, I hope you guys are reading this. By the way, I do respect your posts.)
Well, I, for one, gave the details of my computations.
Let's take the "easiest" one : Quantum Of Solace. There is only a few years of inflation to account for. And no significant currency has been created or disappeared since then.
Your $-centric list gives :
630M$ for QOS.
BoxOfficeMojo, the reference those reliability no one wants to discuss about here, gives 586M$ in 2008. There's no way I could find 630M$ with inflation from that figure.
Actually, to find 630M$ in the CPI calculator in 2012 (the $-centric method that is used even though it's so meaningless...), it means you have to have 591M$ as the ww figure from 2008.
And guess what, another box office source I trust far more, The Numbers.com, gives 591M$ for QOS...
Another example (after China, for instance) that most of the synthetic data here actually does NOT use BoxOfficeMojo, even though you almost all keep on using it as THE source that should end all discussions because some "use it for years" ! There's quite some denial here, people mix "easy to use" and "reliable" :)
And I add even with only 4 years, I still find such computations meaningless ! With only a 5% uncertainty, the rankings can be inverted in many many cases in this list. It's quite silly, frankly, to rank them like this.
Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen a "worldwide ajusted" ranking of the Batman movies trying to compare Batman 1989 and Batman Begins 2005 for instance... Hm, Nolanites more cold-headed than some Bond fans, quite a shock :)
Because of your $-glasses you're the one who described LTK has a big FLOP (it was actually near the #10 of the year...). THIS is negative. I called many many times SF a mega-success, I even was the first here to explain it would beat TDKR everywhere but in the USA, or that in China the first viewings were sold out, despite "all the Internet saying the contrary" in the first days, etc.. I am not negative, it's quite a strawman approach to describe me like that to avoid the conclusion these lists are silly.
Remember that in the few days were lousy reporting from 'the Internet' said that SF was a failure in China (while available source data were already saying the contrary to whose who cared to look for them), we had quite some xenophobic comments about Chinese people here. These comments suddenly stop when the Chinese turned out to actually pay a lot to see SF. And these authors of these comments claim now not to care about box office ? Gee, they actually threw their honour in the dustbin for a few days because of it !
Just curious, for the next Bond, how much should it make for you not to call it a failure ? Internet loves backlash you know (see The Hobbit, criticized for "only making $1bn").
Even more reason to be so proud on Skyfall's box office gross thus far ;-).
Very true has been a great year for unexpected films breaking out so many have most of all Skyfall.
001) $1,094,323,504 -- 'JAMES BOND 23: SKYFALL' (2012, 101 DAYS IN CINEMAS) IMDB: 8.0 ▪
_____DOMESTIC (US) GROSS: $302,823,504 - 27.7%
_____FOREIGN (REST) GROSS: $791,500,000 - 72.3%
So if your source for SF being 4 weeks is him, then it does not mean much alas. It could be 3, 4, 5 or 6 (that covers all the Hollywood movies release in China in the last months I think, with no rules to be able to predict anything). Probably no one knows yet, as it surely depends of the success.
Don't forget firedeep is also someone who is calling SF in China a failure because he was caught in the first days of lousy reportings, and it's hard for many forum 'experts' to acknowledge their skills is sometimes mostly copy/pasting what "The Internet' says.
He seems like an online geek, what I find telling is that he never twitted a single photo of SF in China, or of any other movie, he just tweets URLs. And yet everyone knows he would have quite some clicks if he posted a photo showing 25 viewings of SF available at some Beijing cinema... I have yet to find photos of SF in theaters in China as a matter of fact, outside the premiere !
I, for one, know (or rather, "knew"...) some people in the biz, that's how I could tell you here the first regular viewings of SF (ie : not the premieres) in China were sold out in advance, despite everyone "on the Internet" claiming the following day it was a failure. I think I can spot true "newcomers" :)
He's now claiming SF has a very bad word of mouth, and yet is not able to provide any source for that. I gave here ratings figure from douban from hundreds of thousands of voters, who put SF at 71%, which is actually more than Jackie Chan's last movie for instance, and overall quite a success (MI4 is the notable exception that rates significantly higher there).
On the same forum, you should rather follow someone like Polylove and some others, a much reliable source, and someone who seems to know better. A good rule is that someone claiming to be able to give final box office figures after one day or even before the release, is NOT an experienced person (and yet the carreer of many movies is decided after one day by those handling the distribution !)
[firedeep is currently claiming Stephen Chow's "Journey To The West" will break all the records in China and prevent The Hobbit from doing significant business there, because "looking cheap is a plus here, not a minus", let's see in a few weeks. He may be lucky :) ]
PS : Gustav Graves, I won't convinve you, but ask any accountant working in a worldwide company if he really can have on Tuesday the "actuals" of the business done the week end before. Funny how the "actuals" for overseas box office is rounded at half a million - it looks like some Rentrak estimations, that always round at the nearest hundred of thousands :) It's quite the most "serious" approach actually. It makes the last 6 figures of the worldwide result meaningless though...
Cloud Atlas has been released and SF is still #1, then there are Jack Reacher and then The Hobbit coming (Tom Cruise and 3D are considered as big bonus in China so some success is expected I guess). I'm pretty sure the slots for Hollywood depends on the various success of all the above, I'm not convinced the duration of SF is already decided. The Amazing Spiderman and The Dark Knight Rises were released at the same time and did not have the same duration : TDKR had 6 weeks, TASM had 4, and there was no clearcut decision it would be so from the beginning I think. From what I could see, most have 5, a few have 6, a few have 4, and very few have 3 (like Twilight - Part 1, just recently released there).
htall90, on 03 Feb 2013 - 21:08, said:
How long will skyfall be in cinema in China then?
2 more weeks.
The 2 more weeks is his response i don't how he know's this but he seems to know a lot post on there quiet a lot. I think he may be basing it on the fact that Life of Pi only had 4 weeks in release despite making $90 mil there in 4 weeks.