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
Yes, and with a good average per screen, they are sitill interested in SP.
About MGM and SP earnings:
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/spectre-mgm-earnings-james-bond-1201738434/
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=main&yr=2016&wknd=12&sort=avg&order=DESC&p=.htm
Yes, its very interesting to read that this weekend SP (based on initial estimates) is ranked 10th in the $ average per theatre ranking in North America, and was actually making over twice as much money per theatre as 'SWTFA'.
For reference only 3 weeks ago SP was at a very lowly 85th in the $ per theatre earnings.
:)
see, it's all well and good Bond reaching and crossing 200 million domestic but it was an embarrassingly long crawl to get there. Bond doesn’t and shouldn't have to compete with these new school big boys and irrespective of what we think the producers and studio execs seem to think otherwise unfortunately. SF making a billion was a fluke imo where everything became aligned perfectly but tge producers were overwhelmingly misguided to think that they could repeat such success and even moreso to think such numbers could be achieved regularly with each subsequent outing; it didn't and won't happen. Bond movies shouldn't be costing more than 200 million and they should be aiming for more realistic and achievable returns i.e. circa 700million. Anything more should be a bonus.
Bond carried on quite nicely through the 1980s without ever hitting any box office highs.
Has Spectre now closed? I don't see any figures this week on Box Office Mojo.
They do have to compete if there going to film 250 million dollar scripts.
They should be shooting for about $200 to $250m domestic gross, which would equate to the general trend line for Bond films stateside, accounting for ticket price inflation.
Agreed. Script cost around 150 million... they can film just as great and visually stunning film with 150 as they can with 250m.
Lower budget doesn't mean low rent like LTK. And LTK fans I mean low rent in terms of certain casting, special effects, production design, cinematography, and maybe sound.
Indeed, I cant for the life of me work out how they wrecked £24 million of cars. Its such a mundane chase. Given Bond has just crashed their meeting Hinx should be out for blood and trying to ram Bond off the road. All he does is tailgate him a little.
What really is strange is that only a handful of days ago i.e last Sat SP took $21,198 alone.
If that were the case, then I feel bad for anyone spending $28 per ticket to see this when it's $10 on DVD and maybe $12.99 on sale on blu-ray.
Only TFA and Minions did better.
Spectre was and is universally (sans the US) loved and a huge success for EON.
...impressive but behind Minions. There's no accounting for taste.
It's official!! Hollywood has officially dumb downed Europe :)
Does that include UK or not? If not, you're next. >:)
I had to watch Minions 5 times!! I have a 6 year old daughter.
Still Spectre destroyed even TFA in Switzerland with over one million tickets sold (TFA under 700.000 came second).
My condolences. I had to watch just once with mine.
I also got to watch SP with mine too which was a fun thing.
Not sure how ticket sales are proof that it's 'universally loved'?
1. The word 'universally' does not mean 'just in Europe'.
2. Unless you've interviewed every single person leaving the cinema how do you know how many of those coming out weren't disappointed or said 'Meh. SF was better'?
BvS has made about as much as SP - is that universally loved?
The Wicker Man barely made its BFH* so presume that means it is despised right?
*Bullseye reference there for those of you from the 80s.
The difference is they can't make a new Batman V Superman film in 2018. This one film was supposed to catch DC up with Marvel in terms of popularity, so it kind of failed.
EON can just bring out Bond 25 in 2018/19 and no one will think anything of it.
If SP would not have been liked/loved in general it would never had this kind of tickets sales. Not sure what you are trying to say. Are you mad that SP was such a success just because you didn't like it that much or find it mediocre or whatever?
The comparison to BvS is..well..strange.
I also think it needs to do well in the largest box office market. A 35% decline in revenues (not accounting for ticket price inflation) is a somewhat unheard of reduction. That's how SP performed relative to SF in US/Canada.
Furthermore, I think perhaps it would need to surpass its predecessor in most markets (like SF did to QoS) and not just match it.
The opening weekend to final tally also must be looked at, because that would be an indication of 'legs'. We knew SP would do well enough because it followed SF. The key is how did the box office hold up over several weeks. Was it front loaded in most markets, or did it hold nicely over multiple weeks?
That may all be.
In my opinion if SP hadn't been well received it would not have had this kind of ticket sales, and that's the only way to measure the success of a movie really.
BO was hurt very much by foreign exchange situations, something most people even don't realise.
Of course you can look at it from any perspective and SF was more successful than SP.
But not that much as people might think, and in many important markets SP was only less successful by a hair.
It's just that I find it strange how some people here try to convince themselves and/or others that SP wasn't a success.
If there is any Craig Bond that could maybe be called not that successful it would be QOS but even that was only slightly less successful than CR, and of course GE to QOS all had approximately the same range of ticket sales, so none of those 6 can really be called unsuccessful.
SF rocketed the franchise to new levels. SP made sure the franchise stays there.
The reviews are also more important than the box office when considering universal success (otherwise as some including myself have said BvS is a success because it decimated MoS everywhere at the box office). The same goes for classics (cough) like DAD which were also very successful commercially.
If you take a trip to the Wicker Man, you know it's a one way trip, so no BFH required
And they are, are they not.
Avatar, no matter how awful you and I might think it is, was HUGELY popular and still is.
Titanic is one of the most beloved movies of all time.
I never had the impression that Transformers wasn't loved. Didn't Mark Wahlberg even make this franchise more popular than it already is?
The time factor of course can change how a movie is looked upon.
The Bond franchise is the best example for that I think.
SP may be viewed as another DAD in 15 years or another TSWLM, we'll see.