SPECTRE: It grossed $880 Million Worldwide (..and 2015 was the biggest box office year so far)

1118119121123124152

Comments

  • SPECTRE nears $865 million globally, according to:

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=bond24.htm

  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,092
    Pretty much assured 100% it will hit 200 in NA. Look at The Martian; been out 5 weeks longer, still in almost 300 theaters, still making half a mil on the weekends and doing well during the week. SP will be just fine. It should hit 198 by today or tomorrow at the latest. It's got legs.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    Well now that the Xmas and NY holiday period is over, we are getting more BO news.

    From the UK, i can confirm that Spectre has now overtaken Avatar on the all-time box office list (unadjusted)

    Avatar's gross was £94 mil, and Spectre is currently on £94.25 mil. Though in dollar terms the figure has remained pretty much the same in the last couple of weeks due to the dollar rising in value against the pound.
    Spectre's weekend gross was a strong £274,000.

    Though Spectre overtook Avatar this weekend, BB8 and his friends passed both these two films and now SWTFA stands at £97.25 mil.

    SWTFA is expected to overtake Skyfall next weekend to take the UK BO crown.

    Skyfall's record gross was £103.2 mil.
  • Artemis81Artemis81 In Christmas Land
    Posts: 543
    That's too bad. Didn't mind TFA taking over Spectre in the UK, but Skyfall too. :(
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.

    No, the figure of $865 mil, is not the final figure (that's today's figure). Film is still grossing healthy BO internationally. In Japan the film is currently on $21 mil, and film is still earning good money in Germany. Likely worldwide total will be i'd say around $880 mil, when all is said and done. :)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Even better, I figured it'd be on its way out relatively soon since the movie is slated to release on DVD and blu-ray in a little over a month's time.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 45
    Looks like SP may actually have not beaten Avatar in the UK. Both The Guardian and BBC News are reporting the following numbers as of this weekend:

    Highest-grossing films at the UK and Ireland box office
    1. Skyfall (2012): £102.9m
    2. Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015): £97.6m
    3. Avatar (2009): £94m
    4. Spectre (2015): £92m

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jan/04/star-wars-the-force-awakens-uk-highest-grossing-film-2015?CMP=twt_a-film_b-gdnfilm


    Going to be mega lame if if fails to reach 200m in the US and fails to beat Avatar in the UK, especially with how close it is to both.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    Looks like SP may actually have not beaten Avatar in the UK. Both The Guardian and BBC News are reporting the following numbers as of this weekend:

    Highest-grossing films at the UK and Ireland box office
    1. Skyfall (2012): £102.9m
    2. Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015): £97.6m
    3. Avatar (2009): £94m
    4. Spectre (2015): £92m

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jan/04/star-wars-the-force-awakens-uk-highest-grossing-film-2015?CMP=twt_a-film_b-gdnfilm


    Going to be mega lame if if fails to reach 200m in the US and fails to beat Avatar in the UK, especially with how close it is to both.

    If you read the article, you can see that the figures quoted in the text, and the figures quoted in the table are not the same. Basically its slack reporting.
    Spectre HAS passed Avatar, as of this present time.
    I believe the film trade and box office collection agencies any day, over a newspaper article that has a set of misrepresented data. ;)
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 45
    mepal1 wrote: »

    If you read the article, you can see that the figures quoted in the text, and the figures quoted in the table are not the same. Basically its slack reporting.
    Spectre HAS passed Avatar, as of this present time.
    I believe the film trade and box office collection agencies any day, over a newspaper article that has a set of misrepresented data. ;)

    Hope you're right, I just can't find ANY site anywhere on the internet that reports any recent numbers for Spectre in the UK. Boxofficemojo, boxoffice.com and any other box office site I find on google all seem to stop on December 20th for now. Would love to know where you get the numbers from.

    In the U.S. Spectre pulled in 69K on Monday. At that rate it'll take over 30 days to reach 200m so things aren't looking too good. Hopefully the weekends can squeeze out some better numbers.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    Try 'Screendaily', which is the UK internet film trade version of 'ScreenInternational'. :)

    Here's a quote from the source:-

    SONY

    It may have been outpaced by Star Wars, but Spectre has its own achievement to celebrate.

    Sony’s latest Bond mission added $404,000 (£274,000) for $139.1m (£94.25m) to date, making it the third biggest film of all time at the UK box office ahead of Avatar’s $138.8m (£94m).
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.
  • Posts: 45
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Try 'Screendaily', which is the UK internet film trade version of 'ScreenInternational'. :)

    Here's a quote from the source:-

    SONY

    It may have been outpaced by Star Wars, but Spectre has its own achievement to celebrate.

    Sony’s latest Bond mission added $404,000 (£274,000) for $139.1m (£94.25m) to date, making it the third biggest film of all time at the UK box office ahead of Avatar’s $138.8m (£94m).

    Ahhh very nice, excellent. I do see the UK box office information there. Cheers!
  • Posts: 45
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.

    You know you bring up a very good point that I actually hadn't thought of. In a way it may almost be a bit of a good thing if it does NOT reach 200m, as missing that mark, when SF eclipsed the 300m mark, could kick Eon and team into gear.

    I like Mendes, but I totally agree, P&W, and especially Logan need to go, now.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Personally, I'm glad that SP didn't come close to reaching the success that SF had, mainly because it means the screws will have to be tightened a lot more come 'Bond 25,' and with that will inevitably come a smaller budget. I'm looking forward to seeing what they can do with less.
  • Posts: 725
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.

    No, the figure of $865 mil, is not the final figure (that's today's figure). Film is still grossing healthy BO internationally. In Japan the film is currently on $21 mil, and film is still earning good money in Germany. Likely worldwide total will be i'd say around $880 mil, when all is said and done. :)

    I don't understand the rush to release it in digital so soon. The film is still grossing millions weekly outside of the US, and if Sony will just leave the darn thing in the theaters for another month without any competing media, it should limp to $200m. By releasing it early for downloads, they will likely kill that US $200m possibility off, and also harm the continuing overseas BO where the film still has legs. Why is Sony rushing it.

  • Posts: 1,098
    smitty wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.

    No, the figure of $865 mil, is not the final figure (that's today's figure). Film is still grossing healthy BO internationally. In Japan the film is currently on $21 mil, and film is still earning good money in Germany. Likely worldwide total will be i'd say around $880 mil, when all is said and done. :)

    I don't understand the rush to release it in digital so soon. The film is still grossing millions weekly outside of the US, and if Sony will just leave the darn thing in the theaters for another month without any competing media, it should limp to $200m. By releasing it early for downloads, they will likely kill that US $200m possibility off, and also harm the continuing overseas BO where the film still has legs. Why is Sony rushing it.

    I agree, but the trend seems to be nowadays that the gap between cinema release to home market release is getting shorter and shorter every year.

  • smitty wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.

    No, the figure of $865 mil, is not the final figure (that's today's figure). Film is still grossing healthy BO internationally. In Japan the film is currently on $21 mil, and film is still earning good money in Germany. Likely worldwide total will be i'd say around $880 mil, when all is said and done. :)

    I don't understand the rush to release it in digital so soon. The film is still grossing millions weekly outside of the US, and if Sony will just leave the darn thing in the theaters for another month without any competing media, it should limp to $200m. By releasing it early for downloads, they will likely kill that US $200m possibility off, and also harm the continuing overseas BO where the film still has legs. Why is Sony rushing it.

    Trust me, The Powers have things figured to make the most possible money from SP. And unlike some fans, they presumably don't make a fetish out of an abstract figure such as 200 million in North America.

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    smitty wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    So it appears that it'll top off around $865 million? I figured it'd end at $850 million, so another $15 million tacked on is very nice. So, with the film receiving a return after $650 million, it made $200 million, plus whatever the blu-ray/DVD sales inevitably end at, which should be huge, as well. Well done.

    No, the figure of $865 mil, is not the final figure (that's today's figure). Film is still grossing healthy BO internationally. In Japan the film is currently on $21 mil, and film is still earning good money in Germany. Likely worldwide total will be i'd say around $880 mil, when all is said and done. :)

    I don't understand the rush to release it in digital so soon. The film is still grossing millions weekly outside of the US, and if Sony will just leave the darn thing in the theaters for another month without any competing media, it should limp to $200m. By releasing it early for downloads, they will likely kill that US $200m possibility off, and also harm the continuing overseas BO where the film still has legs. Why is Sony rushing it.

    Trust me, The Powers have things figured to make the most possible money from SP. And unlike some fans, they presumably don't make a fetish out of an abstract figure such as 200 million in North America.

    Trust me. They do. It's a business.

    I agree with above that we shouldn't pay them to make a mediocre effort but I want Bond to stay profitable.

    Logan won't return ...Just crossing fingers they don't turn to P&W to help them get back on track.

    Mendes please go just go...
  • Posts: 1,680
    the change in opinion of Mendes is polarizing, everyone wanted him back after SF now it seems nobody wants to see him helm again. He still has a good chance of returning.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    the change in opinion of Mendes is polarizing, everyone wanted him back after SF now it seems nobody wants to see him helm again. He still has a good chance of returning.

    I know he has said it before, but he said this is it for him after SP.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited January 2016 Posts: 4,116
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    the change in opinion of Mendes is polarizing, everyone wanted him back after SF now it seems nobody wants to see him helm again. He still has a good chance of returning.

    I know he has said it before, but he said this is it for him after SP.

    Yes IMO he has seemed more resolute that no more after SP than after SF. I think he had incentive after SF to continue his story.

    SP was turbulent and I don't think the producers or whomever the studio will be will want to cater to Mendes's schedule either.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    After signing on to durect SP, Mendes even wanted to leave after the whole script debacle so I'm looking forward to hearing who the next director will be. Fingers crossed we get Alfonso Cuaron.
  • Posts: 1,098
    I mentioned not too long ago, that it was common for a Bond film to of been given a theater increase, when nearing the end of its run, to boost the final box office.

    Well, guess what, that is happening to 'Spectre' this weekend, as the theater count in the N.American market has been increased to 379 theaters, up 14.5%.
    As film has now passed the $198 mil mark, it sure looks like the studio does want that $200 mil figure.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I mentioned not too long ago, that it was common for a Bond film to of been given a theater increase, when nearing the end of its run, to boost the final box office.

    Well, guess what, that is happening to 'Spectre' this weekend, as the theater count in the N.American market has been increased to 379 theaters, up 14.5%.
    As film has now passed the $198 mil mark, it sure looks like the studio does want that $200 mil figure.

    And I hope they(we) get it.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.

    Is it deserving of such a high gross? Well box office is hardly an indicator of quality.

    Look at formulaic shoddily written dreck like the Transformers and Avengers films cleaning up and then look at thoughtful films like Bridge of Spies and there's no comparison.

    As a general rule films that cross the billion dollar mark aren't up to much because to achieve that figure you need millions of people to turn up and the general population are by and large idiots who go to watch films aimed at idiots.

    And I'm afraid that our box office impact as hardcore Bond fans probably doesn't even pay the wages of the bloke who shakes the prop martinis.

    The public seem happy enough with a 'dodged up' and 'mediocre' product (your words not mine although I do have plenty of criticisms of SP of my own) so while it's bringing home the bacon why would they change anything?

    I would say that if you deduct the box office bounce from the Olympics stunt, 50th anniversary and Adele being massive in the US then SF's and SP's box office would be pretty similar.

    The problem for the studio of course is that the success of SF convinced EON Mendes was untouchable and he was allowed to decadently spunk a gargantuan budget on pointless conceits such as the biggest explosion in history rather than concentrating on getting the nuts and bolts right.

    Hopefully a scaled back budget will result in a less indulgent film next time round.
  • Posts: 1,098
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.

    Is it deserving of such a high gross? Well box office is hardly an indicator of quality.

    Look at formulaic shoddily written dreck like the Transformers and Avengers films cleaning up and then look at thoughtful films like Bridge of Spies and there's no comparison.

    As a general rule films that cross the billion dollar mark aren't up to much because to achieve that figure you need millions of people to turn up and the general population are by and large idiots who go to watch films aimed at idiots.

    And I'm afraid that our box office impact as hardcore Bond fans probably doesn't even pay the wages of the bloke who shakes the prop martinis.

    The public seem happy enough with a 'dodged up' and 'mediocre' product (your words not mine although I do have plenty of criticisms of SP of my own) so while it's bringing home the bacon why would they change anything?

    I would say that if you deduct the box office bounce from the Olympics stunt, 50th anniversary and Adele being massive in the US then SF's and SP's box office would be pretty similar.

    The problem for the studio of course is that the success of SF convinced EON Mendes was untouchable and he was allowed to decadently spunk a gargantuan budget on pointless conceits such as the biggest explosion in history rather than concentrating on getting the nuts and bolts right.

    Hopefully a scaled back budget will result in a less indulgent film next time round.

    Exactly, i mean EON seemed so happy when they were presented with a certificate from the Guinness book of records for the largest explosion in a film ever.
    But, to me i didn't even notice or care. What i care about is a film having a bloody good story, that engages the attention of the audience.
    Spending millions on non essential things, is a waste of time and potential profit of a film.
    The costs of the recent Bonds have gotten totally out of control, though it did seem that more care was taken with SF after the disastrous QOS. But when EON have a hit film, they seem to lose commonsense again, and for the next film just spend bucket loads of cash.

    If you forget, the tax incentives and what forth, the intial budget of SP was so staggering that only James Cameron's Avatar was more expensive.

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    mepal1 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.

    Is it deserving of such a high gross? Well box office is hardly an indicator of quality.

    Look at formulaic shoddily written dreck like the Transformers and Avengers films cleaning up and then look at thoughtful films like Bridge of Spies and there's no comparison.

    As a general rule films that cross the billion dollar mark aren't up to much because to achieve that figure you need millions of people to turn up and the general population are by and large idiots who go to watch films aimed at idiots.

    And I'm afraid that our box office impact as hardcore Bond fans probably doesn't even pay the wages of the bloke who shakes the prop martinis.

    The public seem happy enough with a 'dodged up' and 'mediocre' product (your words not mine although I do have plenty of criticisms of SP of my own) so while it's bringing home the bacon why would they change anything?

    I would say that if you deduct the box office bounce from the Olympics stunt, 50th anniversary and Adele being massive in the US then SF's and SP's box office would be pretty similar.

    The problem for the studio of course is that the success of SF convinced EON Mendes was untouchable and he was allowed to decadently spunk a gargantuan budget on pointless conceits such as the biggest explosion in history rather than concentrating on getting the nuts and bolts right.

    Hopefully a scaled back budget will result in a less indulgent film next time round.

    Exactly, i mean EON seemed so happy when they were presented with a certificate from the Guinness book of records for the largest explosion in a film ever.
    But, to me i didn't even notice or care. What i care about is a film having a bloody good story, that engages the attention of the audience.
    Spending millions on non essential things, is a waste of time and potential profit of a film.
    The costs of the recent Bonds have gotten totally out of control, though it did seem that more care was taken with SF after the disastrous QOS. But when EON have a hit film, they seem to lose commonsense again, and for the next film just spend bucket loads of cash.

    If you forget, the tax incentives and what forth, the intial budget of SP was so staggering that only James Cameron's Avatar was more expensive.

    Don't get me wrong - it's not my money and I loved the amount of location filming. I'm happy for the budget to stay the same, just spend more than 5 bob on the script.
  • Posts: 1,098
    mepal1 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I want Bond to do well and be successful but what does it say when a mess of a movie is championed and rewarded with huge BO returns? Is SP a movie deserving of reaching and surpassing $200 million domestic? Are we telling EoN it's ok and acceptable to put out a dodged up product because we'll give them our money regardless?

    I love Bond immensely but I also love receiving a good product and a film about my hero that I can be proud of and satisfied with. I don't want to wait 3 to 4 years at a time for half arsed to mediocre Bond movies, especially when they're hyped to high heaven. As far as I'm concerned SP totalling a gross of $800 and something WW is more than enough. I can only pray that the combination of the writing mess, the Sony leaks, the mixed reviews and the clear struggle to reach 200 million domestically can seriously force the producers to take things a lot more seriously and to not dump their hopes and dreams on the likes of their creatively stumped goons in P&W and Mendes. For them, it's time to get out.

    Is it deserving of such a high gross? Well box office is hardly an indicator of quality.

    Look at formulaic shoddily written dreck like the Transformers and Avengers films cleaning up and then look at thoughtful films like Bridge of Spies and there's no comparison.

    As a general rule films that cross the billion dollar mark aren't up to much because to achieve that figure you need millions of people to turn up and the general population are by and large idiots who go to watch films aimed at idiots.

    And I'm afraid that our box office impact as hardcore Bond fans probably doesn't even pay the wages of the bloke who shakes the prop martinis.

    The public seem happy enough with a 'dodged up' and 'mediocre' product (your words not mine although I do have plenty of criticisms of SP of my own) so while it's bringing home the bacon why would they change anything?

    I would say that if you deduct the box office bounce from the Olympics stunt, 50th anniversary and Adele being massive in the US then SF's and SP's box office would be pretty similar.

    The problem for the studio of course is that the success of SF convinced EON Mendes was untouchable and he was allowed to decadently spunk a gargantuan budget on pointless conceits such as the biggest explosion in history rather than concentrating on getting the nuts and bolts right.

    Hopefully a scaled back budget will result in a less indulgent film next time round.

    Exactly, i mean EON seemed so happy when they were presented with a certificate from the Guinness book of records for the largest explosion in a film ever.
    But, to me i didn't even notice or care. What i care about is a film having a bloody good story, that engages the attention of the audience.
    Spending millions on non essential things, is a waste of time and potential profit of a film.
    The costs of the recent Bonds have gotten totally out of control, though it did seem that more care was taken with SF after the disastrous QOS. But when EON have a hit film, they seem to lose commonsense again, and for the next film just spend bucket loads of cash.

    If you forget, the tax incentives and what forth, the intial budget of SP was so staggering that only James Cameron's Avatar was more expensive.

    Don't get me wrong - it's not my money and I loved the amount of location filming. I'm happy for the budget to stay the same, just spend more than 5 bob on the script.

    Yes, we all love the exotic locations etc, but EON still seem to spend an amazing amount of money, compared to other film makers.
    But, as you said, it does appear that the studio doesn't spend more than 5 bob on the script.

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Bob? I don't understand.
Sign In or Register to comment.