› ›

NO TIME TO DIE (2021) - Critical Reaction and Box Office Performance

1…78101213…172

Comments

  • vzokvzok
    Posts: 4,044
    jobo wrote: »
    I am not really concerned about box office numbers to be honest. Practice has shown that the size of the production budget is not really linked with the quality of the finished film. Furthermore the Bond films that have turned out to be super hits at the BO have almost without exception been followed up by a lazy film that simply tries to copy what the previous film did well. A tighter budget which requires more creative output as well as motivation to follow a less succesfull film with a good one, has always been the best recipe for succes through out the franchise's history.

    I pray to god that Bond 25 turns out to be a great film. Wether it beats SW or Frozen for BO numbers I couldn't care less about to be honest...

    This.

    All we really need as fans is for it to be successful enough for them to make the next one.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited January 2019 Posts: 13,791
    My expectations are pretty standard after many years.

    A great Bond film that I love that does big box office. Maybe the best mission ever. And who doesn't enjoy OO7 being #1 for the week.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited January 2019 Posts: 4,516
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The critics can kiss my behind, that is as much I trust a critic these days.

    Best things is that you take what you think is inportent for you or your health.

    About QOS there lie a lot. DAD and SF are over rated.

    With Spectre writers and eon over looking things and the media too. With now waiting longer then ever, you can quistion why Spectre filming stop is not been delayd and have released the movie in December 2015. Stil i think there can fix brother thing.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    M_Balje wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The critics can kiss my behind, that is as much I trust a critic these days.

    Best things is that you take what you think is inportent for you or your health.

    About QOS there lie a lot. DAD and SF are over rated.

    With Spectre writers and eon over looking things and the media too. With now waiting longer then ever, you can quistion why Spectre filming stop is not been delayd and have released the movie in December 2015. Stil i think there can fix brother thing.

    Overrated by who?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I get the latter, but DAD being overrated? Pretty sure most people despise that one, or at least find little to enjoy. I've maybe seen one or two people in my time here place it in their Top 3.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited January 2019 Posts: 2,541
    One thing is bond 25 seems to be targeting American territory this time. They hired an American director for the first time/ an American villian seems to be on the way. Skyfall only made 300 million in US. Bond25 still could target something above 500 million in US since Universal and Annapurna are distributing the film domestically and internationally.
  • Benjamin_Weekly69Benjamin_Weekly69 London
    Posts: 727
    Most moviegoers don't give a toss who the director is. Plus, this bloke is a replacement to Danny Boyle, not pre-planned. And Bond will never make 500 million in the North American market.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited January 2019 Posts: 15,716
    Of the 78 films to have crossed $300 million in the US, only 6 were not sci-fi, animated or superhero related: Titanic, Passion of the Christ, Furious 7, American Sniper , Forrest Gump and Skyfall.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    .Bond 25 will be lucky to cross 250, let alone 300. We are getting ahead of ourselves with such optimistic predictions. The last film was the forgettable entry in years, it will take alot just to get people excited about Bond again. So many other franchises have ruled the roost lately.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited January 2019 Posts: 2,541
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    Of the 78 films to have crossed $300 million in the US, only 6 were not sci-fi, animated or superhero related: Titanic, Passion of the Christ, Furious 7, American Sniper , Forrest Gump and Skyfall.

    Good point didn't knew about that. I am still keeping my hopes high for next entry.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited January 2019 Posts: 3,157
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    .Bond 25 will be lucky to cross 250, let alone 300. We are getting ahead of ourselves with such optimistic predictions. The last film was the forgettable entry in years, it will take alot just to get people excited about Bond again. So many other franchises have ruled the roost lately.

    Ahahahahahahah :)) QoS was regarded much worse than SPECTRE yet the film after that surpassed the 1 billion mark :))
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I think it's a bit laughable to even begin to suggest what the box office take for this film will be - it's opening in a different month than usual, and we're still well over a year from release.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    It's a Bond film, that alone will grant it a success. And Craig is a much beloved Bond, there's no way it's going to do less than double its budget.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited January 2019 Posts: 2,541
    Walecs wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    .Bond 25 will be lucky to cross 250, let alone 300. We are getting ahead of ourselves with such optimistic predictions. The last film was the forgettable entry in years, it will take alot just to get people excited about Bond again. So many other franchises have ruled the roost lately.

    Ahahahahahahah :)) QoS was regarded much worse than SPECTRE yet the film after that surpassed the 1 billion mark :))

    QOS earned 168 million domestically and that too in 2008/SF earned 304 million/ SP 200 million. Bond25 is releasing 4 years after SP and 8 years after skyfall. Most people underestimate bond's box office domination.Yes this film will have some bad effects from SP but not that much considering it's Craig's last.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    RE: Bond 25 box office, I still think it's too early to make projections until we know the cast and the premise. A long time has passed and while that increases anticipation, it also increases risks. As I mentioned on a previous page, given the move of the release date, they will lose the Thanksgiving push and also the Christmas holdover market (both in which Bond films perform above average given their older audience skew). So there is a wildcard aspect to the February 2020 release date, although a less crowded release schedule could help somewhat.

    What is most likely, based off the last 4 Craig films (bar SF, which was a phenomenon and anomaly), is around 24m viewers (butts on seats) stateside. Whatever that translates into given 2020 average ticket prices is a reasonable starting point estimate for US gross, and is likely what they are targeting. Anything less will probably be seen as a disappointment. There is a cap on what a spy film can achieve in the US.

    The foreign gross is trickier to estimate because it will be impacted by currency effects and changes in the marketplace since SP was released (including much increased gross in Asian and Latin American markets vs. Europe). Universal's prowess will come into play here. The foreign gross for B25 should actually be higher than previous entries, because it is a market which is constantly expanding (witness the MI films, which have benefited from this, as has Bond).
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Anything under 800 million dollars worldwide would be a disappointment for Craig's final entry in the series.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    matt_u wrote: »
    Anything under 800 million dollars worldwide would be a disappointment for Craig's final entry in the series.

    I think the this fact alone will likely ensure a gross of around that figure. Potentially throwing in a potential Golden Globe winner as the villain and a cracking PR campaign on top of that, and it's a sure thing.

    It's worth keeping in mind how much different this film will likely be perceived by audiences compared to other Bond films - and it has nothing to do with SP. I don't think there's ever been this sort of common knowledge of "this is X's last Bond film" in the series before. Many people won't give a toss about SP.

    Just look at Logan. That film had a huge risk attached to it in many different ways. They finally got an R-rating and it wasn't a "save the world" type superhero film. But most people knew it was going to be Jackman's last time in the role, the film played to that and it was a huge success as a result.

    If Eon find a way to "big up" that it's Craig's last film without giving off the impression that it's THE LAST BOND FILM, they'll rake it in.

    Despite what people on here may say, Craig is still popular as hell as Bond and the four year gap hasn't changed that.
  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    Posts: 4,409
    I feel Skyfall’s haul was anomaly. It boiled down to the perfect combination of genuine excitement, an auteur director’s involvement, great marketing, strong cast, and (most importantly) little in the way of competition.

    SF was a big player globally. Excluding it’s domestic numbers, it made $804,200,736. That’s almost as much as SP’s entire run.

    Bond only needs to net $200m domestically to be considered a success. The real money is in international sales. Especially as China’s audience has increased tenfold since 2015.

    Bond 25 should hopefully be able to top Mission Impossible: Fallout’s $570,858,348. If Bond posted this number it would be disappointment, especially since Spectre made $680,600,000 internationally.

    I think for Bond 25 to be considered a resounding success it needs to make $700m internationally and £200m domestically for a final tally of $900+ gross. However, if the film only makes $650-750m it would still be successful, but the narrative would be less favourable in entertainment trade circles.

    Though if Bond 25 was to underperform it may be beneficial for the franchise reboot for Bond 26. There you’d have a clean slate (new actor, director, studio) and the narrative would be about rejuvenating the brand. Which is always a favourable story to tell and one the public love………
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    I feel Skyfall’s haul was anomaly. It boiled down to the perfect combination of genuine excitement, an auteur director’s involvement, great marketing, strong cast, and (most importantly) little in the way of competition.

    As well as strong initial appraisal from critics, strong word of mouth, and the fact it was a good film.

    I do feel on this forum there is a tendency for some people to look for reasons, other than the actual quality of the film, to explain why Skyfall made so much money. Public mood, lack of competition, the Summer Olympics, alignment of stars, a particularly wet autumn causing people to head indoors, a sharp rise in guns held to peoples heads, whatever.

    And at the same time try to find every excuse under the sun as to why something like LTK failed to make much of an impact on the box office.
    Bad publicity, too much competition, someone forgot to tell the Americans the film had been released, alignment of stars, a very hot Summer driving people outdoors.

    Some of this may be true of course, but if Skyfall had been so terrible, then word of mouth would have driven it to ground very quickly.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,716
    NicNac wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    I feel Skyfall’s haul was anomaly. It boiled down to the perfect combination of genuine excitement, an auteur director’s involvement, great marketing, strong cast, and (most importantly) little in the way of competition.

    As well as strong initial appraisal from critics, strong word of mouth, and the fact it was a good film.

    I do feel on this forum there is a tendency for some people to look for reasons, other than the actual quality of the film, to explain why Skyfall made so much money. Public mood, lack of competition, the Summer Olympics, alignment of stars, a particularly wet autumn causing people to head indoors, a sharp rise in guns held to peoples heads, whatever.

    And at the same time try to find every excuse under the sun as to why something like LTK failed to make much of an impact on the box office.
    Bad publicity, too much competition, someone forgot to tell the Americans the film had been released, alignment of stars, a very hot Summer driving people outdoors.

    Some of this may be true of course, but if Skyfall had been so terrible, then word of mouth would have driven it to ground very quickly.

    This is also somewhat of a miss-conception too. The Transformers franchise has shown that widely panned films both by critics and moviegoers alike can cross $1 billion at the box office.

  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    I feel Skyfall’s haul was anomaly. It boiled down to the perfect combination of genuine excitement, an auteur director’s involvement, great marketing, strong cast, and (most importantly) little in the way of competition.

    As well as strong initial appraisal from critics, strong word of mouth, and the fact it was a good film.

    I do feel on this forum there is a tendency for some people to look for reasons, other than the actual quality of the film, to explain why Skyfall made so much money. Public mood, lack of competition, the Summer Olympics, alignment of stars, a particularly wet autumn causing people to head indoors, a sharp rise in guns held to peoples heads, whatever.

    And at the same time try to find every excuse under the sun as to why something like LTK failed to make much of an impact on the box office.
    Bad publicity, too much competition, someone forgot to tell the Americans the film had been released, alignment of stars, a very hot Summer driving people outdoors.

    Some of this may be true of course, but if Skyfall had been so terrible, then word of mouth would have driven it to ground very quickly.

    This is also somewhat of a miss-conception too. The Transformers franchise has shown that widely panned films both by critics and moviegoers alike can cross $1 billion at the box office.

    Yes, I always see The Transformers franchise wheeled out as the perfect counter argument to my comment.

    Having never seen these films I'm unable to argue against it, but I would guess that a series based on a kids show and toy range would perhaps find a certain audience, regardless of quality? A bit like Pokémon The Movie did perhaps?

    Like I say I don't know, but in general I would think that a Bond film panned by critics and panned by movie audiences would still make a profit, but never as much as Skyfall did. Had it been hated it would have lost momentum.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    NicNac wrote: »
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    I feel Skyfall’s haul was anomaly. It boiled down to the perfect combination of genuine excitement, an auteur director’s involvement, great marketing, strong cast, and (most importantly) little in the way of competition.

    As well as strong initial appraisal from critics, strong word of mouth, and the fact it was a good film.

    I do feel on this forum there is a tendency for some people to look for reasons, other than the actual quality of the film, to explain why Skyfall made so much money. Public mood, lack of competition, the Summer Olympics, alignment of stars, a particularly wet autumn causing people to head indoors, a sharp rise in guns held to peoples heads, whatever.

    And at the same time try to find every excuse under the sun as to why something like LTK failed to make much of an impact on the box office.
    Bad publicity, too much competition, someone forgot to tell the Americans the film had been released, alignment of stars, a very hot Summer driving people outdoors.

    Some of this may be true of course, but if Skyfall had been so terrible, then word of mouth would have driven it to ground very quickly.

    This is also somewhat of a miss-conception too. The Transformers franchise has shown that widely panned films both by critics and moviegoers alike can cross $1 billion at the box office.

    Yes, I always see The Transformers franchise wheeled out as the perfect counter argument to my comment.

    Having never seen these films I'm unable to argue against it, but I would guess that a series based on a kids show and toy range would perhaps find a certain audience, regardless of quality? A bit like Pokémon The Movie did perhaps?

    Like I say I don't know, but in general I would think that a Bond film panned by critics and panned by movie audiences would still make a profit, but never as much as Skyfall did. Had it been hated it would have lost momentum.
    Not just Transformers mind you. There were quite a few terribly panned films released last year which did very well at the box office (I'd say it's the 'Asian' factor), and vice versa the prior year (think BR2049).

    SF was a perfect storm. A confluence of factors. It was the 'Thriller' of the Bond franchise. It would be unwise to expect lightning to strike twice though, and particularly in quick succession (in terms of releases). These sorts of films which hit a high mark with audiences and critics normally stay at the top of the pile for some time. It's almost like they have to burn their way out of the public's (and critic's) consciousness, and that takes a while.

    SF was certainly not hated at the time of release. I'd say quite the opposite actually. IT was lauded. It will be interesting to see what the one 'global' release date of Feb 14th will mean for critics, because in the past Bond films have 'basked' in glowing British reviews prior to hitting the US market two weeks later. In the case of SF, the trickle down effect worked wonders, but in the case of SP, the opposite happened (many US critics blasted the film).
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    A Bond film will never fail financially. SP could have been the worst film in the world and even if Bond 25 came out 1, 2, 3, 5 or even 7 years after it would have no real adverse impact on it. Bond is a bulletproof cash cow and the revenue would pour in as long as the film's are genuinely good. If CR was released as Bond 25 and irrespective of it being Craig's last; and reworked as film that wasn't about Bond just becoming a double O, it would make close to or surpass a $Billion EASILY.

    SP's success and critical reception really doesn't matter at all. As long as Bond 25 turns out to be a good movie, it'll take in the $$. If it turns out to be a great movie, we can have a serious discussion about it joining the $Billion club. It's Bond for crying out loud. It'll always perform better than MI money wise and if Aquaman can be THIS close to making a Billion, Bond 25 has every chance of doing the same.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Guys, I'm not wanting to let anyone down, but Bond 25 will do well to top 750 million.

    At a complete guess I'd put it around 780 - 90, and that's being generous.

    I think many around here are putting far to much stock into "Craig's last Bond film" being a box office draw. I really don't think that's a factor because Bond has had many popular incarnations in the past and will do in the future. There has never been anyone who has played Wolverine in a big budget movie before other than Hugh Jackman. The role is iconic to him and only him. Same with Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones. Craig is just another actor to play a popular character. If it weren't for the fact that SF made a billion then there would be no reason to believe that Bond 25 has a chance at 800 million. But people didn't go and see SF in droves because they loved Craig they went because they loved Skyfall. Word of mouth for the movie itself is what made it a phenomenon. It was, as others point out, lightening in a bottle. But now apparently not only is it possible to replicate that success, but we should expect it from a film which we don't even know the cast of yet, or a filming location? I think we're getting ahead of ourselves, because understandable fans of a franchis want the next film to be good, so they start to convince themselves that it will be good, but there is a danger in building expectations too high.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2019 Posts: 23,883
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I know what you're saying. I humiliated myself on the old box office thread by predicting $1.2bn for SP before release. Shows what I know. I've learned my lesson and will temper expectations. As long as it does $800M + I think it will be considered a success, and that should be reasonably achievable as long as the usual strong markets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Australia continue to show outsize returns, the US gross doesn't crater (it shouldn't) and China increases (it should).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited January 2019 Posts: 8,395
    bondjames wrote: »
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I know what you're saying. I humiliated myself on the old box office thread by predicting $1.2bn for SP before release. Shows what I know. I've learned my lesson and will temper expectations. As long as it does $800M + I think it will be considered a success, and that should be reasonably achievable as long as the usual strong markets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Australia continue to show outsize returns, the US gross doesn't crater (it shouldn't) and China increases (it should).

    I did exactly the same, which is where I learned lessons. Trouble is now I the same mistakes being made.

    I honestly think it will be difficult in China, because the type of film Craig makes doesn't translate well. I think the Brosnan films would have slain it over there had the market been anywhere near the size it is now.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I know what you're saying. I humiliated myself on the old box office thread by predicting $1.2bn for SP before release. Shows what I know. I've learned my lesson and will temper expectations. As long as it does $800M + I think it will be considered a success, and that should be reasonably achievable as long as the usual strong markets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Australia continue to show outsize returns, the US gross doesn't crater (it shouldn't) and China increases (it should).

    I did exactly the same, which is where I learned lessons. Trouble is now I the same mistakes being made.

    I honestly think it will be difficult in China, because the type of film Craig makes doesn't translate well. I think the Brosnan films would have slain it over there had the market been anywhere near the size it is now.
    I don't disagree on the relative historic popularity of the Craig films in China. The market has grown since 2015 though, so as long as it does just as well as SP did and picks up traction in some other growing markets (including Latin America and Mexico) it should do ok. These global markets are massive factors now, and can be wild cards.

    I also think a Brosnan style Bond film would be very popular in the Chinese market today, given their interest in the FF franchise and other more lighter action oriented fare like MI.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited January 2019 Posts: 2,541
    bondjames wrote: »
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I know what you're saying. I humiliated myself on the old box office thread by predicting $1.2bn for SP before release. Shows what I know. I've learned my lesson and will temper expectations. As long as it does $800M + I think it will be considered a success, and that should be reasonably achievable as long as the usual strong markets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Australia continue to show outsize returns, the US gross doesn't crater (it shouldn't) and China increases (it should).

    I never expected SP to get past SF but I did expected at least 1 Billion and it was before I watched SP nevertheless it was 120 million short,Yes it's too early to say if bond25 could get past SF but that doesn't mean it doesn't have the potential. I am keeping my hopes up because Bond25 can't be worse than SP imho.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Resurrection wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    @Mendes4Lyfe, I know what you're saying. I humiliated myself on the old box office thread by predicting $1.2bn for SP before release. Shows what I know. I've learned my lesson and will temper expectations. As long as it does $800M + I think it will be considered a success, and that should be reasonably achievable as long as the usual strong markets of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Australia continue to show outsize returns, the US gross doesn't crater (it shouldn't) and China increases (it should).

    I never expected SP to get past SF but I did expected at least 1 Billion and it was before I watched SP nevertheless it was 120 million short,Yes it's too early to say if bond25 could get past SF but that doesn't mean it doesn't have the potential. I am keeping my hopes up because Bond25 can't be worse than SP imho.
    It certainly has potential. Particularly since there isn't much in the same space between now and release date, except for the third Kingsman entry which skews towards a younger demographic. 2015 was a very competitive marketplace in this genre and SP came out at the end of the year when audiences (certainly I) may have been exhausted by spy fare. It will be a different timing in 2020.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Guys, I'm not wanting to let anyone down, but Bond 25 will do well to top 750 million.

    At a complete guess I'd put it around 780 - 90, and that's being generous.

    I think many around here are putting far to much stock into "Craig's last Bond film" being a box office draw. I really don't think that's a factor because Bond has had many popular incarnations in the past and will do in the future. There has never been anyone who has played Wolverine in a big budget movie before other than Hugh Jackman. The role is iconic to him and only him. Same with Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones. Craig is just another actor to play a popular character. If it weren't for the fact that SF made a billion then there would be no reason to believe that Bond 25 has a chance at 800 million. But people didn't go and see SF in droves because they loved Craig they went because they loved Skyfall. Word of mouth for the movie itself is what made it a phenomenon. It was, as others point out, lightening in a bottle. But now apparently not only is it possible to replicate that success, but we should expect it from a film which we don't even know the cast of yet, or a filming location? I think we're getting ahead of ourselves, because understandable fans of a franchis want the next film to be good, so they start to convince themselves that it will be good, but there is a danger in building expectations too high.

    Literally nobody who knows what they're talking about will say that.

    And I don't think there's "too much stock" being put into it being Craig's last. It's a pretty big hinge that could work wonders if it's used right. And yes, all the Bonds were popular, but nobody really knew when their last film was going to be their last. And that is a fundamental key difference whether you're a fan of Craig or not. The point of "all the Bonds being popular so this won't be any better than those" isn't really relevant at all in general really either, considering how different the box office works now compared to, say, even ten years ago.

    In the current climate $750-800million is very feasible. MI managed it. No reason why Bond can't, regardless of the previous films critical reception.

    It could all go tits up, for sure. Anything's possible, nothing is for certain. But there's far more reason to believe it'll do well than it won't.
Sign In or Register to comment.