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 does not, if you count all the money they got for advertising. Like this, the real production costs are lower, as others paid for parts of it.
http://www.thewrap.com/spectre-is-2nd-highest-grossing-james-bond-movie/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Alert&utm_term=breaking-news
Yep, and I saw it. Though I don't believe it. I recalculated some scenario's, and the author uses the current box office figures from the UK and USA and adds only $10 Million on top of that. That's not going to happen. Moreover, where is Japan? That will most likely add another $30 Million.
The author needed to look at what the global box office gross would be at the end of March 2016....which he clearly didn't. All countries combined..."SPECTRE" should easily gross another $150 Million on top of the current $750 Million.
Star Wars was made in the UK, at Pinewood - so you could say it is as British as Bond
I think it's much fairer to say that:
--> "Moonraker" was a French/British co-production
--> "Casino Royale" was a Czech/British co-production
--> "Skyfall" was a Chinese/British co-production
So the new goal would be now to overtake Pixar's "Inside Out", which stands at $852 million at the moment.
750-800 million is probably the amount of money that would have been made in 2012 without the 50th Birthday of the Bond series, Olympics and lot of media coverage.
All true, but the current ER factor plays a great role in the bigger SF BO. I would love to see SF's BO configured with the current ER which is costing SP many millions in profit in comparison to SF's BO.
I still think if SP was better movie it'd be making a lot more money and doing SF numbers. I personally know a number of people who havn't seen SP and won't see it just because they read unfavourable reviews. I think the business it's already done is fantastic and nothing to be ashamed of in the slightest but had a few key elements worked better, SP would have grosser more than 800 million by now.
But the mixed reviews in the US were strange. Some top reviewers for major news sources like Rolling Stone, Time Magazine, the New Yorker, New York Magazine, the NY Daily News and others all gave it good, in some cases, very good reviews. It's not like SP got nothing but lousy reviews in the US. These are all big deal US news sources with big circulations.
I still think some of the negative US reviews were in part influenced by the leaks and the negative vibes for Sony. Some were also due to the change in tone from the very serious SF. Many of those reviewers wanted SF2 and weren't happy when they didn't get it, so it was a mixture of issues, but the US review patterns were very, very strange.
You've asked for it. Here you go!
I took the FX rate as of November 2012 and compared it with the current FX rate for the 13 major currencies (EUR, GBP, CHN,...) which represent 90% of SFs non domestic box office.
The result is quite substantial!
ALL those currencies developed negatively against the USD.
Between 1 and 52%!!! Most importantly, the GBO is 6% weaker while the EUR is 17% weaker.
So, SF did 770 Mio USD in the 57 major markets except US/CAN.
These 770 Mio USD would today equal:652 Mio USD.
So with its 304 Mio USD domestically, and the remaining 34 Mio USD I can't specify by country, SF would have done today 990 Mio USD!
Compare this to SP's expected ~900 Mio USD and the picture looks different.
If you then consider, that SP lost a mininum of 100 Mio USD only domestically in the US/CAN, SP is just as big as SF
It's the math...
(however, we should not forget that there has also been a slight inflation in all markets which makes each SP ticket cost more than a SF ticket)
That's how you look at it really. Saying that the success of 'SF' is a one-off and can't be duplicated sounds a bit narrow-minded for me.
Look to "The Dark Knight Rises" and how it basically sailed on the success of its predecessor "The Dark Knight". It can be done. Perhaps really a SF 2.0 could have resulted in a $1.2 Billion global box office result. Or what about a Bond-film that is daring enough to 'grab' and 'utilize' a matter/aspect/element that has never been done before in a Bond film. You could make a really unique and refreshing action film if you ask me, that still is 'Bond' enough.
As a matter of fact, I am working on it now ;-).
Thanks for the info. I think it is probably as accurate a reading on the ER impact that we could get. It's interesting that in a number of BO press articles about SP, they consistently fail to mention the ER factor. Of all the facts that caused SP to not match SF's BO, I think the ER was the most important.
It's a credit to SP's earning power that the harm the ER caused, the lack of SF's Olympics PR, Adele's huge hit, and the gushing US reviews still did not keep SP from doing as as well as it did. It should hit $800m very soon. It may not make $900m, but it might get close.
Add it up ($30 + $30 + $15 + $20) and you have another $95 Million. And then I still haven't counted all other nations (Russia, Australia, India, Mexico)
SF was a flash in the pan, SP is another 007 movie that is just another movie with a rather too large a budget.
I'm afraid that's not entirely true. Especially not for my country The Netherlands, as you can find here:
http://www.boxofficenl.net/
http://www.boxofficenl.net/listing.asp?page=total&ref=19536
After 5 weeks it's still no# 1, even now "The Good Dinosaur" and "Hunger Games 4" have premiered there. And currently it has grossed €15 Million there. Today's figures.
Yes, but that amount is more or less the same amount you see everywhere. Every $15 Million is in the mix now. $15 Million / €15 Million ($1 = almost €1) are the real-life figures until now.
At this stage three years ago "SF" scored around $13 Million (it went on to earn $25 Million). My point is: There's still another $10 Million that will be earned by "SP".
But it's all good. ;)
Honestly, I think this is a lesser repeat of what QoS experienced. A few dolts around the world with the so-called authority of their critic status whined about the movie and blew some criticisms out of proportion, then everyone else followed suit because humans are naturally ready to follow the pack. It's all about agreement reality; when a few people share a similar view, another few adopt the idea because of its popularity, and another group does the same after that; what results is a massive pool of individuals who have toed the line and followed the pervading opinion.
This is of course not to say that every critic who is/was lukewarm to SP is a fool or follower. I've read plenty of sharp, perceptive and well-argued criticisms since the film's release. Some of the criticism the film has gotten, however, seems to reek of more than a few people following the pack, so to speak, instead of really thinking about the film on their own terms.
And of course, it's important to note that negativity is a cancerous thing; when we are surrounded by such dourness of thought, we become suffocated by it and adopt that gloom as our own as the negativity of others rains on our parade and almost parasitically makes us not as appreciative of the thing we are experiencing as we should or could be.
I feel that this element or idea is what separates my feelings and reactions following my viewings of SF and SP. Because SF was so blown up and raved about both before and after the film released, I overall felt ecstatic and rather happy with what we got. With SP, I heard both great and okay things about it before its release, and not a lot of positives after, and that negativity colored my response as rather mixed as well. I think I somehow foolishly left myself open to that negativity too much and let a few select people ruin my fun. Because after SF released everyone around the world was largely riding a wave of positivity, it became easier to ride that same wavelength until the fun died down and I was then able to judge it objectively without that same period of hype affecting my thoughts. With SP the same will be true; this wave of negativity and shaming will die down, and afterwards I'll return to the film when that suffocating climate has subsided to view the film objectively without worrying about my feelings being manipulated by the sweeping opinions of the world at that time.
I personally haven't had a great year, especially the second half of 2015, and because of that, I think it was so much easier for me to be swept up in the negativity towards SP-because I was already feeling depressed and upset-which makes me both infuriated and rather ashamed. I'm now at the point where I can't tell whether my criticisms of some parts of the film are my own or if that negativity exists only because it's suffocating all of us right now through these select reviews and taking the enjoyment of the film away.
I'm going to see SP for a second time soon, and I hope to clear my head of some of this BS when I'm in the theater again. Bond films are a source of happy release for me, and I will not have this negativity affect my positivity any longer.
I saw SF during one of the worst times in my own life, and I'm SURE that coloured my reception of it.
And I hope 2016 is better for you!
I'm sorry for that for you both. SF was released during a high time of my life. Now is much harder but I'm still blessed.
PM me.
Really. I also had a very difficult first half of the year. Like so many times in my life, I had to go on sickness leave again. And now my situation has slightly improved again -like so many times as well...even those improvements come a bit tiresome- I'm longing for a good movie experience. Which I had with SP. But....well...you know what happened then with certain reviews.
If your hobby because a welcome enjoyous lifeline in your life, then you don't want to have further 'negativity' arround you.
If you read my posts carefully, then you would have found out that I think "Star Wars 7" will overtake "Titanic"s all time box office total..which is $2.1 Billion.
What makes you say that I 'shrug off' "Star Wars 7"? I may not talk that much about the film. But then again this is mostly a Bond forum no :-)?
http://www.007james.com/articles/box_office.php
....is how much easier Daniel Craig's films compete with those of Sean Connery...financially and with inflation correction.