› ›

Skyfall: Billion Dollar Bond

1…5354565859…82

Comments

  • maxcraigmaxcraig
    edited January 2013 Posts: 229
    acoppola wrote:
    Rubbish, at least here in America. Skyfall is doing well because it's a great movie. The trailer did its job and sold the movie well. The Queen and the Olympics had NOTHING to do with America's box office success. Featuring Adele on the soundtrack probably brought in some of has die hard fans, but the rest was traditional marketing followed by positive word of mouth.

    Bond 24 will have a better box office numbers in America, regardless if the story is good or not. Dark Knight Rises had a better box office than Dark Knight even though Dark Knight was the far superior movie. People were just hyped up to see the sequel of a blockbuster.

    As for China, they have very weak copyright laws. Newspaper articles that say Skyfall will open in China in February are usually followed by a bunch of comments from English-speaking expats living in China that Skyfall has already been shown in the theaters and released on DVD! With the copyright issue, I wonder why the distributes did not open in China as one of the first markets. By the time it officially opens, everyone that wanted to see it, would have already seen it.

    Rubbish? No guesses where you can stick it! Seeing as you had trouble using the quoting system, I understand if you need help in finding out where.

    So you are telling me with all seriousness that the huge global audience for the Olympics including America did not help put the forthcoming Bond film into the public's consciousness? That's right, Sony or EON did it for the sake of it.

    Let me tell you, that the publicity of the Queen's participation made it a huge draw! And Americans are drawn to the myth of British royalty. American news networks will devote inordinate amounts of time to any crap they can get on the royal family. The amount of Americans I met in the States who asked me if I live near Buckingham Palace is incredible. They think England is Disney F'ing World!

    So tell me in all seriousness that it had no impact on the box office? Look how much more SF took than CR and QOS. Why? CR got great reviews and word of mouth too, so why far less?



    As for the SF trailer. I thought it was bland and it was not what made me go see it. It certainly did not scream it was Bond compared to a Brosnan movie. Subtly yes! SF had an incredible hype machine behind it. Sony used the synergy of all the arms of their corporation. Anything with the name Sony like a mobile phone had SF attached to it.

    Yes SF had great word of mouth, but it was also blatantly aimed at non-Bond fans. The amount of people I know that went to see it who do not like James Bond films is staggering. They went on the basis that they were told it is nothing like the Bond of before and a serious piece of film making.



    [/quote]

    8-}
  • thelordflasheartthelordflasheart
    Posts: 1,370
    I live in Canada, and as a member of the Commonwealth (the Queen is our Head of State, she's on all our money, and government departments are called "Royal" or "Her Majesty's") you would think that we would be more invested in the royal connection than the US. It's purely anecdotal, but based on friends that I have in both the US and Canada people here are more interested in/aware of the UK than in the US.

    Having said that, the only people that I heard talking about the Bond skit with the Queen from the Olympics opening ceremony were people who were already Bond fans or strong Anglophiles (who tend to be Bond fans anyway). I talked to many people about the Olympics opening ceremony and the "general public" never mentioned the Bond skit unless they were already fans. And this is here in Canada.

    I think that the Olympics had very little impact on Bond's box office in the US.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    It was certainly good to raise awareness, but that's it. The rest was up to the film itsself, as is the mattter for every film. We have seen films tank with big names attached and the opposite. A film needs to appeal to the targeted audiences and best beyond. The films, who do that, will be called a success, NEVER MIND how much money they brought in, as the expectations differ. SF certainly hit it off with the targeted audiences and way beyond, WHICH is the reason IMO, it did so well. There was something in it for everybody, not only Bond fans.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited January 2013 Posts: 11,119
    Germanlady wrote:
    It was certainly good to raise awareness, but that's it. The rest was up to the film itsself, as is the mattter for every film. We have seen films tank with big names attached and the opposite. A film needs to appeal to the targeted audiences and best beyond. The films, who do that, will be called a success, NEVER MIND how much money they brought in, as the expectations differ. SF certainly hit it off with the targeted audiences and way beyond, WHICH is the reason IMO, it did so well. There was something in it for everybody, not only Bond fans.

    I also think you can look forward to an influx of new Bond fans thanks to 'Skyfall'. Pre-Skyfall you already had those Bond fans. But it always meant that in reviews (IMDB for instance) there was always a group of 'Bond haters'; people who skipped Bond because it was Bond.

    With 'Skyfall' I think that has changed substantiously. I also think that the rather young, new fanboys of 'The Dark Knight' and Christopher Nolan's films will now look forward in great anticipation to the 24th Bond film.

    I can remember all the negativity surrounding the pre-production of J.J. Abrahms 'Star Trek' in 2009. Trekkies hated it when Abrahms admitted he wanted to attract a new influx of fans and when he wanted to uplift the production scale to 'Star Wars'-like proportions. Well, it worked. Moreover, afterwards the fast majority of conservative Trekkies loved it.

    I think something similar is happening to 'Skyfall' now. Until 'Skyfall' Bond fans were, understandably, a bit sceptical and conservative at times. Not to mention the heated discussion about gunbarrel-sequence, which is such a daft item for anyone except Bond fans. But post-Skyfall, the current Bond fans, which we can find on these forums, have changed a bit too. They understand now that Bond has been truly uplifted as a franchise. From now on Bond is indeed bigger than pre-Skyfall.

    And I haven't talked about myself yet. Yesterday I bought the Taschen 007 Archives Book. I can fully admit that I have become more nerdy, more fanatical thanks to 'Skyfall' :-P.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Gustav_Graves wrote:
    I also think you can look forward to an influx of new Bond fans thanks to 'Skyfall'. Pre-Skyfall you already had those Bond fans. But it always meant that in reviews (IMDB for instance) there was always a group of 'Bond haters'; people who skipped Bond because it was Bond.

    Yes and hopefully this new breed of Bond lovers will go back and reassess or acquaint themselves with the previous 50 years of Bond cinema. Maybe they will find something to admire.

  • mepal1mepal1
    Posts: 1,098
    Comte_de_Bleuville wrote:
    JamesPage wrote:
    Nope, sorry... Where did Sightandsound specify number for admissions?

    Nobody has worldwide admissions numbers for films from the '60s. It's all pure guesswork. As it would be today, too, as very few countries count it that way now either.

    If someone doesn't like the way inflation is calculated on one side of the argument, they can't throw out statements like 'more people saw film X' when there are no numbers to back it up either.

    Except in France. Because they count things the right way. Yey.

    Exactly.

    And it’s interesting, isn’t? That in France (a well documented participant in Bond Mania in the 60s) it can be demonstrated that Skyfall has sold more tickets than GF and TB.

    But I bet there are those who can tell us why that doesn’t matter too.

    Yes........i agree that the worldwide admissions for older films are estimates, but you can get a general idea by using the admission figures as collated in the North American market, and these are documented!
    btw:- TB had admissions of 15.6 mil in the UK!
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited January 2013 Posts: 2,015
    JamesPage wrote:
    As it would be today, too, as very few countries count it that way now either.

    Today, I know you can have admission figures for France, Germany, China very easily. Probably other countries too I think. Their archive over 50 years is another matter !
    JamesPage wrote:
    Except in France. Because they count things the right way. Yey.

    But then what is "more successful", 6.6M (lets make it 5.5M with releases) amongst 40M potential viewers (France in 1965), or 7M over 60M ? "1ticket for 8 French" is less "successful" than "1 ticket for 10 French" really ? :) To some it sounds trivial, to me it sounds meh. I prefer the discussion about DVD and TV to conclude comparisons are worthless ! Here about 3/4 of the people I know who went to see Skyfall didn't actually pay specifically to see that movie, as a matter of fact, one could ponder that into the equation (illimited movie cards that are very, very popular in Paris - amongst regular moviegoers that is) to create even more headaches :)

    And Germany also count things the right way, but well, the result are not liked by many it seems ! Even though it concludes GF, TB and SF are mega-success there !
    acoppola wrote:
    As for China, they have very weak copyright laws. Newspaper articles that say Skyfall will open in China in February are usually followed by a bunch of comments from English-speaking expats living in China that Skyfall has already been shown in the theaters and released on DVD! With the copyright issue, I wonder why the distributes did not open in China as one of the first markets. By the time it officially opens, everyone that wanted to see it, would have already seen it.

    First, there were early rumors it would open in China even before the US !
    Second, yes, Skyfall is now in China in "DVD", in the sense that since a few days, it is available on the "internationally illegal" but very popular Chinese yyets platform.

    I had a look at the competition SF will face in China. Apart from piracy, it will mostly be the ongoing success of the releases the weeks before (whose data will be soon available everywhere), currently that's the "Chinese Hangover" that's breaking records (8M viewers... in its 3rd week (NOT cumulative)). On the few days before and after SF is released there are animations movie (to fill the 3D screens ?), and this (with typos included) :



    Mod edit: double post merged into one.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    I had a look at the competition SF will face in China. Apart from piracy, it will mostly be the ongoing success of the releases the weeks before (whose data will be soon available everywhere), currently that's the "Chinese Hangover" that's breaking records (8M viewers... in its 3rd week (NOT cumulative)). On the few days before and after SF is released there are animations movie (to fill the 3D screens ?), and this (with typos included) :


    Is there a tiny grain of 'positivity' in your system? I didn't see you here during the less succesful, but still very succesful Bond films 'Casino Royale' and 'Quantum Of Solace'. And now with 'Skyfall'.....
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited January 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Isn't Armour Of God 3 (or Chinese Zodiac or whatever you want to call it) out in China now? That should be tough competition.
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited January 2013 Posts: 2,015
    Gustav_Graves wrote:
    Is there a tiny grain of 'positivity' in your system?

    Where were you when I explained here to Samuel that Skyfall would beat TDKR in many countries, except for the USA ? When I write here several times SF is a mega-sucess, why do you feel it is negative because I add GF and TB were too ? Etc..

    Gee, receiving this comment from someone who said LTK was a flop and the gunbarrel is daft :)
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Isn't Armour Of God 3 (or Chinese Zodiac or whatever you want to call it) out in China now? That should be tough competition.

    Yes it is, but since the 17th of December. And its career has been shadowed by the "Chinese" Hangover record breaking film released the week before. On its 2nd week, "Lost in Thailand" did three times more than Chan's latest film 1st week.

    Mod edit: double post merged into one.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,985
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Isn't Armour Of God 3 (or Chinese Zodiac or whatever you want to call it) out in China now? That should be tough competition.

    That it is; you've no idea how jealous I am.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Creasy47 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    Isn't Armour Of God 3 (or Chinese Zodiac or whatever you want to call it) out in China now? That should be tough competition.

    That it is; you've no idea how jealous I am.

    I'm pretty sure it's not getting a UK release date so I've been looking for it online. If I can't find it I'll get the DVD.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    thelordflasheart wrote:
    I live in Canada, and as a member of the Commonwealth (the Queen is our Head of State, she's on all our money, and government departments are called "Royal" or "Her Majesty's") you would think that we would be more invested in the royal connection than the US. It's purely anecdotal, but based on friends that I have in both the US and Canada people here are more interested in/aware of the UK than in the US.

    Having said that, the only people that I heard talking about the Bond skit with the Queen from the Olympics opening ceremony were people who were already Bond fans or strong Anglophiles (who tend to be Bond fans anyway). I talked to many people about the Olympics opening ceremony and the "general public" never mentioned the Bond skit unless they were already fans. And this is here in Canada.

    I think that the Olympics had very little impact on Bond's box office in the US.

    I see where you are going with this. Whether people talk about it or not, it is in their consciousness. I do not hear people talk about the advertising in Formula 1 either but you bet it works. Why do think millions are spent on adorning the cars with different brands?



    The Olympics being so close to SF's release date was perfect timing. The image of the actor playing Bond was seen by billions around the globe. Add that then to the huge advertising campaign and the marketers have done their job!

    You may as well also say the Royal family has no impact on British tourism just like the Olympics had no impact on raising awareness of Bond. Do you know how much tourism we get from the States because of the royals?

    Seeing Bond with the Queen was a big deal. It does not happen every day. I am not a monarchist or care, but it is what it is.

  • JamesPageJamesPage Administrator, Moderator, Director
    Posts: 1,380
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    But then what is "more successful", 6.6M (lets make it 5.5M with releases) amongst 40M potential viewers (France in 1965), or 7M over 60M ? "1ticket for 8 French" is less "successful" than "1 ticket for 10 French" really ? :) To some it sounds trivial, to me it sounds meh. I prefer the discussion about DVD and TV to conclude comparisons are worthless ! Here about 3/4 of the people I know who went to see Skyfall didn't actually pay specifically to see that movie, as a matter of fact, one could ponder that into the equation (illimited movie cards that are very, very popular in Paris - amongst regular moviegoers that is) to create even more headaches :)

    So who had January 4th on their betting slip? The day that someone argued SKYFALL was not the most successful 007 film in France because despite selling more tickets than any other film (raw audience count), it's not the #1 because the percentage of the population that bought tickets in 2012 was lower compared to 1965.

    FFS...
  • wildboonjivewildboonjive
    edited January 2013 Posts: 299
    CIA wrote:
    SF benefitted from the unbelievable global marketing boost of the Olympics and I think the box office that appearing with the Queen gave amongst casual cinemagoers shouldn't be underestimated.

    Rubbish, at least here in America. Skyfall is doing well because it's a great movie. The trailer did its job and sold the movie well. The Queen and the Olympics had NOTHING to do with America's box office success. Featuring Adele on the soundtrack probably brought in some of has die hard fans, but the rest was traditional marketing followed by positive word of mouth.

    Bond 24 will have a better box office numbers in America, regardless if the story is good or not. Dark Knight Rises had a better box office than Dark Knight even though Dark Knight was the far superior movie. People were just hyped up to see the sequel of a blockbuster.

    As for China, they have very weak copyright laws. Newspaper articles that say Skyfall will open in China in February are usually followed by a bunch of comments from English-speaking expats living in China that Skyfall has already been shown in the theaters and released on DVD! With the copyright issue, I wonder why the distributes did not open in China as one of the first markets. By the time it officially opens, everyone that wanted to see it, would have already seen it


    @CIA, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this. I work in the film business, on the market research side. One of the projects that we worked on was a test of audience's reaction to the SF teaser. We did this back in the month of June. The results that we gathered may surprise you in that the teaser, for the most part, did NOT PLAY WELL with casual moviegoers. I am giving you stats that are factual. Most did not even realize it was a James Bond movie while watching it, doing so only at the end.

    I agree 100% that the strong word of mouth the film has benefited from has been paramount to its success in America. Especially considering that it clearly crossed over beyond its fan base into a large chunk of the "average movie-goer" demographic. The grosses prove that to be the case. But I know this did not happen from the teaser trailer. In this sense, we cannot underestimate the impact that the Olympics' appearance had. I am not implying that it is strictly due to that. However, even for Americans, it surely played its role. It cannot be underestimated. The marketing for the film in the weeks close to release was outstanding, and this was just another part of that.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited January 2013 Posts: 28,694
    Skyfall's BO intake is not what it is because of a short moment in the Olympics. I haven't heard anyone even talk about that for months now. Stuntmen jumping out of a helicopter aren't enough to net you a billion. It's because Skyfall is a cracking great film.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited January 2013 Posts: 11,119
    JamesPage wrote:
    Suivez_ce_parachute wrote:
    But then what is "more successful", 6.6M (lets make it 5.5M with releases) amongst 40M potential viewers (France in 1965), or 7M over 60M ? "1ticket for 8 French" is less "successful" than "1 ticket for 10 French" really ? :) To some it sounds trivial, to me it sounds meh. I prefer the discussion about DVD and TV to conclude comparisons are worthless ! Here about 3/4 of the people I know who went to see Skyfall didn't actually pay specifically to see that movie, as a matter of fact, one could ponder that into the equation (illimited movie cards that are very, very popular in Paris - amongst regular moviegoers that is) to create even more headaches :)

    So who had January 4th on their betting slip? The day that someone argued SKYFALL was not the most successful 007 film in France because despite selling more tickets than any other film (raw audience count), it's not the #1 because the percentage of the population that bought tickets in 2012 was lower compared to 1965.

    FFS...

    =D>

    Nice to see you here @JamesPage :-)
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Skyfall's BO intake is not what it is because of a short moment in the Olympics. I haven't heard anyone even talk about that for months now. Stuntmen jumping out of a helicopter aren't enough to net you a billion. It's because Skyfall is a cracking great film.

    I think, it was said before, that the Olympics gig raised awareness. Nobody is dismissing that as a fact. But awareness is only the first step. The film has to do the rest and without being considered a great movie by most, it would be nowhere the billion it is.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Why should it matter if TB or Skyfall is more successful? Both are magnificent examples of the mountains Bond films can move and the accolades they can attain. We should be proud that both exemplify great films rewarded by success both financially and critically, not which one outsold the other or took in more money at the box office. At the end of the day all you are fighting over is which of the two great films beat the other when the important thing is that the two films really were "great" in their own right.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,985
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Why should it matter if TB or Skyfall is more successful? Both are magnificent examples of the mountains Bond films can move and the accolades they can attain. We should be proud that both exemplify great films rewarded by success both financially and critically, not which one outsold the other or took in more money at the box office. At the end of the day all you are fighting over is which of the two great films beat the other when the important thing is that the two films really were "great" in their own right.

    As I've said: both have achieved $1 billion, and that is a monumental, wonderful accomplishment in itself. Last year gave us SF - a wonderful 50th Anniversary gift - and no matter how much it makes, I'm happy with the final product.
  • St_GeorgeSt_George Shuttling Drax's lovelies to the space doughnut - happy 40th, MR!
    edited January 2013 Posts: 1,699
    I'd be rather pleased if SF overtook TB as definitively the most financially successful Bond film of all-time, but it's hardly a massive deal for me - TB's holding of that honour is all about history (mid-'60s 'Bondmania' and all that), and I'm rather fond of that history; perhaps fonder of it than I am of TB itself. ;)

    What would be seriously significant would be if SF not only overtook TB but also managed to pull off that Best Picture Oscar nom - amazingly, the PGA nod suggests it's more than possible. Watch this space, I guess... :)
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Creasy47 wrote:
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    Why should it matter if TB or Skyfall is more successful? Both are magnificent examples of the mountains Bond films can move and the accolades they can attain. We should be proud that both exemplify great films rewarded by success both financially and critically, not which one outsold the other or took in more money at the box office. At the end of the day all you are fighting over is which of the two great films beat the other when the important thing is that the two films really were "great" in their own right.

    As I've said: both have achieved $1 billion, and that is a monumental, wonderful accomplishment in itself. Last year gave us SF - a wonderful 50th Anniversary gift - and no matter how much it makes, I'm happy with the final product.

    You know Creasy47? If 'Skyfall' would at this very moment be at a worldwide box office gross of -let's say- $672 million, newly welcomed forummembers, like @Suivez_ce_parachute, would not have been posting there arguments so fiercely. Let's say, 'Skyfall' shoke up a lot of people :-).
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    I think it's a combination of more than one thing that led to SF making a billion. The Olympics DID play a part in it, so did the reviews and word of mouth, etc.

    The film wouldn't have gotten a billion if it wasn't a good film. But I also don't think it would've gotten a billion if it wasn't for the Olympics. It was basically a massive advert that helped get people intrested in the film.

    I'm not that fussed about it beating TB. At the end of the day they're all Bond films, they're not in competiton with eachother.

    I'm more bothered about it beating Batman. That film was the sequel to The Dark Knight, it was so anticipated, and if Bond has come out of nowhere and manages to beat it, I'll be very happy. It'll prove that 007 is on top again.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    I think it's a combination of more than one thing that led to SF making a billion. The Olympics DID play a part in it, so did the reviews and word of mouth, etc.

    The film wouldn't have gotten a billion if it wasn't a good film. But I also don't think it would've gotten a billion if it wasn't for the Olympics. It was basically a massive advert that helped get people intrested in the film.

    I'm not that fussed about it beating TB. At the end of the day they're all Bond films, they're not in competiton with eachother.

    I'm more bothered about it beating Batman. That film was the sequel to The Dark Knight, it was so anticipated, and if Bond has come out of nowhere and manages to beat it, I'll be very happy. It'll prove that 007 is on top again.

    It doesn't prove anything. If it tops TDK or Rises, congratulations, but that doesn't mean one film is better than the other. Everyone is acting like BO battles are for supremacy. Why can't we just be happy that all these great films (Batman, Bond and others included) have gotten such great critical marks and monetary support. That is what matters at the end of the day, that good filmmaking is still rewarded.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited January 2013 Posts: 12,837
    TDKR was one of, if not the, most anticipated film of the year. It had tons of people waiting with baited breath for it, it was the sequel to The Dark Knight, one of the most successful films of all time.

    If Bond beats that, it's the icing on the cake. It proves that Bond is back on top again, for the first time since the 60s (not that the series hasn't been successful since then, they've always been extremely popular films, but it hasn't been this successful since the 60s).

    And I really enjoyed TDKR, but I think SF is a better film and deserves more money.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    TDKR was one of, if not the, most anticipated film of the year. It had tons of people waiting with baited breath for it, it was the sequel to The Dark Knight, one of the most successful films of all time.

    If Bond beats that, it's the icing on the cake. It proves that Bond is back on top again, for the first time since the 60s.

    And I really enjoyed TDKR, but I think SF is a better film and deserves more money.

    Again, you're missing the point... :-<
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    I think it's a combination of more than one thing that led to SF making a billion. The Olympics DID play a part in it, so did the reviews and word of mouth, etc.

    The film wouldn't have gotten a billion if it wasn't a good film. But I also don't think it would've gotten a billion if it wasn't for the Olympics. It was basically a massive advert that helped get people intrested in the film.

    I'm not that fussed about it beating TB. At the end of the day they're all Bond films, they're not in competiton with eachother.

    I'm more bothered about it beating Batman. That film was the sequel to The Dark Knight, it was so anticipated, and if Bond has come out of nowhere and manages to beat it, I'll be very happy. It'll prove that 007 is on top again.

    I'm trying to say the same for quite some time now @thelivingroyale :-). I fully agree with you.

    Concerning Nolan's Dark Knight-trilogy, its success also did not happen 'straight away'. 'Batman Begins' (2005) is my 2nd favourite Dark Knight-film after 'The Dark Knight' (2008). And 'Batman Begins' got great reviews as well. But the film brought in a rather 'normal' worldwide box office figure of $374,218,673. Considerably less than 'Casino Royale's' $599,045,960.

    And during production of 'The Dark Knight' it was not until the first screeners that journalists were raving this movie. But most importantly Heath Ledger's death, which was associated with the complexity of The Joker's character, became the real 'free publicity stunt'. The mania surrounding Ledger's death got not only Batman-fans interested, but also many other people who normally would not visit these action heroe movies.

    Then there was the Awards season. Also during that period 'The Dark Knight' got extra publicity. Heath Ledger's posthumous Oscar made sure 'The Dark Knight' finished above the magical $1 Billion mark. I also think 'The Dark Knight Rises' was greatly helped by the success of 'The Dark Knight'.

    I think we see something similar with 'Skyfall' now. All aspects combined together -Oscar starcast, Javier Bardem, 50 year anniversary, Adele, actual Awards buzz, raving reviews- made sure that 'Skyfall' is where it's now.

    That's why I always said 'Skyfall' is today's 'Thunderball' and it can also be compared with the success of 'The Dark Knight'.

    Now we can discuss all the arguments until we weigh an ounce, but fact is, for a Bond movie, 'Skyfall' will always be that unique terrific moneymaker. In the upcoming years, 'Skyfall' will become an instant classic, even more than all its predecessing Bond films.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    thelivingroyale wrote:
    TDKR was one of, if not the, most anticipated film of the year. It had tons of people waiting with baited breath for it, it was the sequel to The Dark Knight, one of the most successful films of all time.

    If Bond beats that, it's the icing on the cake. It proves that Bond is back on top again, for the first time since the 60s.

    And I really enjoyed TDKR, but I think SF is a better film and deserves more money.

    Again, you're missing the point... :-<

    I think, he is only missing YOUR point but has nicely laid on his own, on which I agree.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited January 2013 Posts: 12,837
    What I think is really impressive is this.

    TDKR was always going to be a hit. It was the sequel to TDK, it was pretty much guaranteed a billion.

    SF had QOS before it, which got mixed reviews and isn't really thought of as a great film overall by most people. QOS was not a huge Oscar winning hit, it was a Bond film that most people thought was below par.

    If SF beats TDKR, it will have succeeded on it's own. Sure it had the Olympics but it wasn't the sequel to an award winning mega hit, it didn't have 6 superheroes teaming up and the actor who played the villian didn't die.

    If SF beats TDKR, the main reason will have been because it's a good film. A good film that came out of nowhere and beat TDKR even though that film had a major advantage thanks to TDK, and I think that's really impressive.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited January 2013 Posts: 11,119
    Another update of the 'Spy/Action Movies-list'. As of January 4th 2013, 'Skyfall' surpassed that other succesful film from 2008, 'The Dark Knight'! Christopher Nolan's 'The Dark Knight' got rave reviews and was prone to some unexpected media buzz. Something that is happening to 'Skyfall' now as well.

    Great to see that Sam Mendes' film and Nolan's films are getting on with each other quite well ;-).

    Note for the reader: Take in mind that for, more or less, accurate comparisons, most of the below action/spy movies are produced in 1987 or later. Actually, most of them were produced after the 1990's. All movies in this list are 2D movies!

    Furthermore, I have updated the list in such a way now, so that you can also use it as a 'watchlist'. Movies with a '▪' are part of a spy/actionhero movie franchise. Movies with a '▫' are rebooted movies or remakes. Movies with a '∞' are based on previous tv-series.

    *UPDATED FRIDAY JANUARY 4TH 2013*:

    001) $1,081,041,287 -- 'Batman 8: The Dark Knight Rises' (2012) IMDB: 8.8 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $448,139,099 - 41.5%
    foreign (rest) gross: $632,902,188 - 58.5%

    002) $1,005,330,000 -- 'JAMES BOND 23: SKYFALL' (2012, 71 DAYS IN CINEMAS) IMDB: 8.0 ▪
    DOMESTIC (US) GROSS: $294,730,000 - 29.3%
    FOREIGN (REST) GROSS: $710,600,000 - 70.7%

    003) $1,004,558,444 -- 'Batman 7: The Dark Knight' (2008) IMDB: 9.0 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $534,858,444 - 53.2%
    foreign (rest) gross: $469,700,000 - 46.8%

    004) $825,532,764 -- 'Inception' (2010) IMDB: 8.8
    domestic (US) gross: $292,576,195 - 35.4%
    foreign (rest) gross: $532,956,569 - 64.6%

    005) $786,636,033 -- 'Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull' (2008) IMDB: 6.4 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $317,101,119 - 40.3%
    foreign (rest) gross: $469,534,914 - 59.7%

    006) $694,713,380 -- 'Mission: Impossible 4 - Ghost Protocol' (2011) IMDB: 7.4 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $209,397,903 - 30.1%
    foreign (rest) gross: $485,315,477 - 69.9%

    007) $624,386,746 -- 'Hancock' (2008) IMDB: 6.5
    domestic (US) gross: $227,946,274 - 36.5%
    foreign (rest) gross: $396,440,472 - 63.5%

    008) $599,045,960 -- 'James Bond 21: Casino Royale' (2006) IMDB: 7.9 ▪ ▫ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $167,445,960 - 28.0%
    foreign (rest) gross: $431,600,000 - 72.0%

    009) $586,090,727 -- 'James Bond 22: Quantum Of Solace' (2008) IMDB: 6.7 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $168,368,427 - 28.7%
    foreign (rest) gross: $417,722,300 - 71.3%

    010) $546,388,105 -- 'Mission: Impossible 2' (2000) IMDB: 5.9 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $215,409,889 - 39.4%
    foreign (rest) gross: $330,978,216 - 60.6%

    011) $543,848,418 -- 'Sherlock Holmes 2: A Game Of Shadows' (2011) IMDB: 7.6 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $186,848,418 - 34.4%
    foreign (rest) gross: $357,000,000 - 65.6%
    012) $524,028,679 -- 'Sherlock Holmes 1' (2009) IMDB: 7.5 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $209,028,679 - 39.9%
    foreign (rest) gross: $315,000,000 - 60.1%
    013) $478,207,520 -- 'Mr. And Mrs. Smith' (2005) IMDB: 6.4 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $186,336,279 - 39.0%
    foreign (rest) gross: $291,871,241 - 61.0%
    014) $474,171,806 -- 'Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade' (1989) IMDB: 8.3 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $197,171,806 - 41.6%
    foreign (rest) gross: $277,000,000 - 58.4%
    015) $457,696,359 -- 'Mission: Impossible' (1996) IMDB: 7.0 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $180,981,856 - 39.5%
    foreign (rest) gross: $276,714,503 - 60.5%
    016) $450,717,150 -- 'Ocean's Eleven' (2001) IMDB: 7.7 ▪ ▫
    domestic (US) gross: $183,417,150 - 40.7%
    foreign (rest) gross: $267,300,000 - 59.3%
    017) $442,824,138 -- 'The Bourne Ultimatum' (2007) IMDB: 8.1 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $227,471,070 - 51.4%
    foreign (rest) gross: $215,353,068 - 48.6%
    018) $431,971,116 -- 'James Bond 20: Die Another Day' (2002) IMDB: 6.0 ▪
    domestic (US) gross: $160,942,139 - 37.3%
    foreign (rest) gross: $271,028,977 - 62.7%
    019) $411,348,924 -- 'Batman 1' (1989) IMDB: 7.6 ▪ ▫ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $251,188,924 - 61.1%
    foreign (rest) gross: $160,160,000 - 38.9%
    020) $397,850,012 -- 'Mission: Impossible 3' (2006) IMDB: 6.8 ▪ ∞
    domestic (US) gross: $134,029,801 - 33.7%
    foreign (rest) gross: $263,820,211 - 66.3%
    021) $383,531,464 -- 'Die Hard 4: Live Free Or Die Hard' (2007) IMDB: 7.4 ▪
    022) $378,882,411 -- 'True Lies' (1994) IMDB: 7.2
    023) $372,710,015 -- 'Batman 6: Batman Begins' (2005) IMDB: 8.3 ▪ ▫
    024) $366,610,723 -- 'Taken 2' (2012) IMDB: 6.6 ▪
    025) $366,101,666 -- 'Die Hard 3: Die Hard With A Vengeance' (1995) IMDB: 7.3 ▪
    026) $362,744,280 -- 'Ocean's Twelve' (2004) IMDB: 6.2 ▪
    027) $361,832,400 -- 'James Bond 19: The World Is Not Enough' (1999) IMDB: 6.3 ▪
    028) $352,194,034 -- 'James Bond 17: GoldenEye' (1995) IMDB: 7.2 ▪
    029) $352,114,312 -- 'Catch Me If You Can' (2002) IMDB: 7.9
    030) $341,433,252 -- 'Wanted' (2008) IMDB: 6.7 ▪
    031) $333,011,068 -- 'James Bond 18: Tomorrow Never Dies' (1997) IMDB: 6.4 ▪
    032) $321,731,527 -- 'Lethal Weapon 3' (1992) IMDB: 6.6 ▪
    033) $311,312,624 -- 'Ocean's Thirteen' (2007) IMDB: 6.9 ▪
    034) $300,428,192 -- 'The Expandables 2' (2012) IMDB: 7.1 ▪
    035) $293,503,354 -- 'Salt' (2010) IMDB: 6.4
    036) $288,500,217 -- 'The Bourne Supremacy' (2004) IMDB: 7.7 ▪
    037) $285,444,603 -- 'Lethal Weapon 4' (1998) IMDB: 6.5 ▪
    038) $278,346,189 -- 'The Tourist' (2010) IMDB: 5.9
    039) $277,448,382 -- 'xXx 1' (2002) IMDB: 5.7 ▪
    040) $276,144,750 -- 'The Bourne Legacy' (2012) IMDB: 6.9 ▪
    041) $274,470,394 -- 'The Expendables' (2010) IMDB: 6.5 ▪
    042) $264,105,545 -- 'Charlie's Angels 1' (2000) IMDB: 5.5 ▪ ∞
    043) $261,930,436 -- 'Knight And Day' (2010) IMDB: 6.3
    044) $255,000,211 -- 'Cliffhanger' (1993) IMDB: 6.3
    045) $259,175,788 -- 'Charlie's Angels 2: Full Throttle' (2003) IMDB: 4.7 ▪ ∞
    046) $240,031,094 -- 'Die Hard 2: Die Harder' (1990) IMDB: 7.1 ▪
    047) $230,685,453 -- 'Get Smart' (2007) IMDB: 6.6 ∞
    048) $227,853,986 -- 'Lethal Weapon 2' (1989) IMDB: 7.1 ▪
    049) $226,830,568 -- 'Taken' (2009) IMDB: 7.9 ▪
    050) $217,764,291 -- 'Collateral' (2004) IMDB: 7.6
    051) $215,887,717 -- 'Jack Ryan 3: Clear And Present Danger' (1994) IMDB: 6.8 ▪
    052) $214,034,224 -- 'The Bourne Identity' (2002) IMDB: 7.9 ▪ ▫
    053) $212,404,396 -- 'Entrapment' (1999) IMDB: 6.1
    054) $207,884,401 -- 'Safe House' (2012) IMDB 6.8
    055) $200,512,643 -- 'Jack Ryan 1: The Hunt For Red October' (1990) IMDB: 7.6 ▪
    056) $199,006,387 -- 'Red' (2010) IMDB: 7.0
    057) $193,921,372 -- 'Jack Ryan 4: The Sum Of All Fears' (2002) IMDB: 6.3 ▪
    058) $191,185,897 -- 'James Bond 15: The Living Daylights' (1987) IMDB: 6.7 ▪
    059) $178,051,587 -- 'Jack Ryan 2: Patriot Games' (1992) IMDB: 6.9 ▪
    060) $177,238,796 -- 'The A-Team' (2010) IMDB: 6.8 ▪ ∞
    061) $176,070,171 -- 'The Italian Job' (2003) IMDB: 6.9 ▪ ▫
    062) $170,268,750 -- 'Starsky And Hutch' (2004) IMDB: 6.0 ∞
    063) $165,322,000 -- 'Argo' (2012) IMDB: 8.3
    064) $159,330,280 -- 'The Jackal' (1997) IMDB: 6.1 ▫
    065) $156,491,279 -- 'This Means War' (2012) IMDB: 6.3
    066) $156,167,015 -- 'James Bond 16: Licence To Kill' (1989) IMDB: 6.5 ▪
    067) $143,049,560 -- 'Spy Game' (2001) IMDB: 6.9
    068) $140,767,956 -- 'Die Hard 1' (1988) IMDB: 8.3 ▪
    069) $130,786,397 -- 'Unknown' (2011) IMDB: 6.9
    070) $126,690,726 -- 'Law Abiding Citizen' (2009) IMDB: 7.3
    071) $124,305,181 -- 'The Thomas Crown Affair' (1999) IMDB: 6.7 ▫
    072) $120,207,127 -- 'Lethal Weapon 1' (1987) IMDB: 7.6 ▪
    073) $118,063,304 -- 'The Saint' (1997) IMDB: 6.0 ∞
    074) $115,097,286 -- 'Body Of Lies' (2008) IMDB: 7.1
    075) $104,391,623 -- 'The Tuxedo' (2002) IMDB: 5.0
    076) $101,191,884 -- 'The Recruit' (2003) IMDB: 6.5
    077) $099,965,792 -- 'Hitman' (2007) IMDB: 6.2
    078) $099,480,480 -- 'The Good Sheperd' (2007) IMDB: 6.8
    079) $098,159,963 -- 'Killers' (2010) IMDB: 5.2
    080) $096,105,964 -- 'The Manchurian Candidate' (2004) IMDB: 6.6 ▫
    081) $094,882,549 -- 'Green Zone' (2010) IMDB: 6.9
    082) $089,456,761 -- 'The Long Kiss Goodnight' (1996) IMDB: 6.7
    083) $085,416,905 -- 'Max Payne' (2008) IMDB: 5.7
    084) $082,087,155 -- 'Abduction' (2011) IMDB: 4.7
    085) $080,630,608 -- 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' (2011) IMDB: 7.1 ∞
    086) $078,004,341 -- 'Jack Reacher' (2012) IMDB: 7.3
    087) $071,022,693 -- 'xXx 2: State Of The Union' (2005) IMDB: 4.1 ▪
    088) $070,692,101 -- 'Ronin' (1998) IMDB: 7.2
    089) $067,876,281 -- 'The American' (2010) IMDB: 6.4
    090) $065,977,295 -- 'Bad Company' (2002) IMDB: 5.4
    091) $060,965,854 -- 'Colombiana' (2011) IMDB: 6.2
    092) $060,222,298 -- 'The Ghost Writer' (2010) IMDB: 7.3
    093) $060,161,391 -- 'The International' (2009) IMDB: 6.5
    094) $056,308,881 -- 'Lucky Number Slevin' (2007) IMDB: 7.8
    095) $052,826,594 -- 'From Paris With Love' (2010) IMDB: 6.4
    096) $051,070,807 -- 'The Mechanic' (2011) IMDB: 6.5
    097) $050,732,945 -- 'I Spy' (2002) IMDB: 5.3 ∞
    098) $43,394,000 -- 'Red Dawn' (2012) IMDB: 5.7
    099) $041,771,168 -- 'The Informant!' (2009) IMDB: 6.5
    100) $033,372,606 -- 'Haywire' (2012) IMDB: 5.9
    101) $028,008,462 -- 'The Tailor Of Panama' (2001) IMDB: 6.1
    102) $027,664,173 -- 'Traitor' (2008) IMDB: 7.0
    103) $027,038,732 -- 'Rendition' (2007) IMDB: 6.8
    104) $024,188,922 -- 'Fair Game' (2010) IMDB: 6.8
    105) $019,924,033 -- 'Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever' (2002) IMDB: 3.5
    106) $016,933,380 -- 'Largo Winch 1: The Heir Apparent' (2008) IMDB: 6.4
    107) $015,705,007 -- 'Enigma' (2001) IMDB: 6.4
    108) $014,046,075 -- 'Largo Winch 2' (2011) IMDB: 6.0
    109) $008,112,712 -- 'Spartan' (2004) IMDB: 6.7
    110) $000,933,549 -- 'Michel Vaillant' (2003) IMDB: 5.0
Sign In or Register to comment.