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
It's not even the critics but the basement dwelling YouTubers giving it a bad rap. I feel that in today's society, that holds more weight than critics
Will DOD match NTTD's worldwide gross 774.2 million? Maybe not!
That's an almost 2 year difference. People weren't flocking to the movies yet.
She’s right. She should have had more screen time.
https://www.cbr.com/indiana-jones-5-karen-allen-missed-george-lucas-steven-spielberg/
I don't see it happening.
However, that’s still a huge drop from CRYSTAL SKULL. In spite of its reputation on the internet, that film was a much bigger hit with audiences in 2008. I think part of that was GenX parents bringing their kids along to see their cinematic childhood hero on the screen.
Skyfall: 26.6% ("domestic")/73.4% ("international")
Spectre: 22.7/77.3
No Time to Die: 20.8/79.2
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: 40.1/59.9
(Shares were similar for Last Crusade, while the domestic box-office for Raiders and Temple was higher than what it was in the rest of the world, provided of course that the stats on boxofficemojo.com are true)
https://www.jpbox-office.com/fichfilm.php?id=21346&view=2
As for the "flop". It is not a flop to have a movie open with $60 million dollars, but when the budget for said movie is $295 million it doesn't bode well for a good return. Likely a drop off in the second weekend, so if it drops by 25% that would be really strong. The Flash dropped by 70% and it will likely have trouble making it to $100 million USD.
Indy might have legs. Old fans like me might be more likely to check out the movie after the opening weekend. The reviews aren't as terrible as other movies. So while I won't say DOD can be another Top Gun Maverick, it might surprise people and have legs in the theatres.
"A flop" isn't in regards to its opening weekend but rather its full return over the theatrical run. With an opening like that for a film that cost over $400 million, I'll be surprised if it ends up as anything but.
Well, so what? It is what it is and it makes what it makes. I think it deserves loads more, but that may be just me. And what if it doesn't make more...will that endanger any future Indiana Jones movie? Oh, wait, there won't be any more of that either way.
Too bad the last one may not have any satisfactory proceeds in spite of being loved by a sizable number of viewers. Definitely including myself.
We were discussing it being a "flop," to which I countered it really doesn't have anything to do with its opening weekend but rather the overall total. It's just a discussion that keeps coming up, nobody is framing it as a discussion of what it might mean for the future of the series.
The likes of said YouTubers like Critical Drinker are pushing a narrative, battling all that is supposedly feminism, woke, the death of the white male hero, etc. and Kathleen Kennedy is the devil in disguise.
There is some truth in the current trend of Hollywood killing off its main hero characters (Bond, Logan, Luke and Han, etc.) or turning them into older depressing, lonely characters (Bond, Luke and Indy), while younger female protagonists steal the show from under them, so I can see where the point of view comes from, but I do think these YouTubers are pushing their agenda too far, and too extreme.
I'm no fan of either NTTD or Last Jedi, and partly because of this Hollywood trend, and I did have fears that I wouldn't like Indy 5 either, but happily I was wrong on DOD.
However, had they killed off Indy at the end of DOD, I would be right on the Critical Drinker bandwagon too. That would have been a step too far for me.
To celebrate the new film and the whole series I've put together a music video with clips from all five films.
Interesting. I thought The Flash and DOD were at the two ends of the spectrum. DOD was terrific while the Flash was.....................................................
Dial won’t even make $400M worldwide.
Excellent post, very true.
Indiana Jones has a panel at Comic Con this year.
Distributors and studios get a decreasing share of the box-office with each passing week. The figures are secret but the 50% share for both that’s often used as a reference is just an average. Studio will get 70% for instance for the first weekend then less and less.
That’s why it’s not at all the same thing if a film gets almost all of its box-office in the first two weeks and then collapses or if it has legs and turns into a slow burn that stays at the bottom of the top 10 for three months.
Most films don't make a billion or more so it's not credible for Disney to say "Top Gun 2 made over a billion so Indiana Jones 5 can do the same numbers." Yeah, well in theory, but most films don't gross over a billion and fewer are going to hit a billion post coronavirus because more people will skip the theatrical release, wait 45 days or so and watch it on streaming or digital rental.
A few films will be major box office blockbusters but I fear many mid to high budget films are never going to be hits. We're seeing many big budget films underperforming. The Flash, Ant Man 3, Black Adam, Elemental, Lightyear, Indiana Jones 5 etc. The bar to break even is too high. We have big budget films opening to 60 million dollars and that's considered a flop opening. Crazy! 60 million is still a huge amount but it's regarded as tiny compared to the vast amount needed to break even.
Indy 5 was a legacy sequel anyway — it had been in planning/pre-production whilst still under Lucas for a number of years. How much of that was left and made it to screen, who knows.
I’m using Legacy Sequel here in terms that it is a production inherited during the takeover, and is a sequel.
Tbh usually Legacy Sequel just usually means a sequel that’s to quite an old property, the whole ‘adding new characters’ thing is a fairly recent use of the word. Grows out of sequels having ‘legacy’ characters, which again is confusing in a way. Is ‘Grease 2’ not a straightforward sequel because the only returning actors/characters are bit parts? Is it an early example of a ‘Legacy Sequel’? What about Predator 2 with *no* returning characters — pure sequel, all others legacy sequels unless they have the same protagonist/actors? Alien Resurrection has *one* returning star, but is not playing the exact same character… was Phantom Menace a Legacy Prequel? What about when we get a sequel that contradicts other sequels, but keeps or shares cast and production members, or returns them? Halloween? Terminator: Dark Fate?
The hoops we jump through sometimes eh?
Thinking about it, every Bond film from OHMSS or DAF on, and certainly LALD might technically be a legacy sequel, with an absolute definite for TLD on because that Bond really *cannot* be the same from Dr. No because of age alone, but there’s Q, our legacy character. Does Judi remaining as M make the Craig era Legacy Sequel or reboot?
It’s a handy phrase for describing the recent glut of franchises, but we never really saw it applied to early ones — Tron Legacy (oh the irony) or even Jurassic World at its release. After a while it becomes a bit… nebulous as a description.
I have some objections (lack of Spielberg's direction, it's 20 minutes too long), but it has the Indiana Jones look and feel, and that's what matters to me. I unfortunately haven't felt that with Bond films lately.
Not better than the first 3, but easily beats KOTCS.