Spectre box office discussion

Wow! Lots of people on Facebook seem to not be all that happy with it, so I assumed it was getting mixed reviews… Well, yeah, it will definitely surpass SP.

There's speculation that TFA will be the first movie to break $2 billion at the box office.

So SPECTRE did a little less than $1.5m this weekend...by Christmas it should be on par with MI5...it's a scraping match after that and might crawl just short of $200m because it will lose more screens on Christmas Day. By comparison, Skyfall was doing at least a million per day during its Christmas week...SPECTRE will be lucky to do $300,000 per day.

It looks like it will do about $850m worldwide after all is said and done.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

There's speculation that TFA will be the first movie to break $2 billion at the box office.

That's already beaten by TITANIC and AVATAR. Thing that made those unique was that they did not have a big opening weekend like TFA, but they had strong legs that they played in theaters for months, which is unheard of in the last two decades. TFA will have to keep it up in order to break those records.

As expected, SPECTRE lost about 2/3 of the screens it had on Christmas Eve thanks to 5 new movies which opened on Christmas Day. It will make about 750k-800k max this weekend, putting it just over $196m in the USA. It beat MI5 but has fallen way, way short of Skyfall.

Looks like its final US gross will be around $197.5m....so nope, it won't make 200million....

By the way, a high-quality DVD 'screener' has leaked....

bitchcraft wrote:

As expected, SPECTRE lost about 2/3 of the screens it had on Christmas Eve thanks to 5 new movies which opened on Christmas Day. It will make about 750k-800k max this weekend, putting it just over $196m in the USA. It beat MI5 but has fallen way, way short of Skyfall.

Looks like its final US gross will be around $197.5m....so nope, it won't make 200million....

By the way, a high-quality DVD 'screener' has leaked....

I've got to believe the film will find some way of making 2.5 million dollars between now and .....mid-January? It won't go over 200$ million by much, but I think it will cross over...just barely.

Won't get any help from me, though. I've seen it once and that was enough. I've seen STAR WARS twice.

I've told this story before but I'll tell it again. Picture it...Sicily...Summer of 1983....I was a young boy of 12 years of age...... a burgeoning Star Wars fan; owned most of the action figures, play sets (Hoth, Dagobah). I went into that summer with all the intentions of leaving it a bigger Star Wars fan that before. But then I ran headfirst into a little film called OCTOPUSSY that changed my life forever. That summer I gave up my action figures and my playsets and moved on to more sophisticated and worldly pursuits its i.e. James Bond.

But I've felt an...awakening for lack of a better word. Something has called out to me in the new STAR WARS film; something that has been missing from the Bond Series as of late: fun. Yes, they aren't exact comparisons. I find myself thinking about what comes next for Star Wars. I find myself thinking about the next films...I find myself picking up, then putting back, Star Wars merchandise (only a matter of time before I give in). I find myself not really caring anymore about what comes next for the Bond series.

It's hard to fathom that a movie that makes $850 million could be considered a failure, but it feels like one. Maybe Babs can find her a director and writer who are interested in entertaining rather than in deconstructing Bond and retconning an entire movie and book series just to shoehorn plot points into the current film that would make no sense otherwise.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I've got to believe the film will find some way of making 2.5 million dollars between now and .....mid-January? It won't go over 200$ million by much, but I think it will cross over...just barely.

I doubt it...it's only on about 330 or so screens right now. It might make about $400,000 Mon-Fri and maybe another $400,000 over the New Year weekend taking it over $197m...but it will dwindle down badly after that. SPECTRE is now just a fart lost in the Star Wars hurricane....

$850 might not be a failure but it's a whole $1/4 billion short of its predecessor. The bean counters are going to be cussing when Bond 25 comes around, no way they're spending another SPECTRE type budget....

Maybe Craig will join the cast of STAR WARS and get a light-saber up his ass. He deserves it after his tantrum in the press....

[quote="bitchcraft"]

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I've got to believe the film will find some way of making 2.5 million dollars between now and .....mid-January? It won't go over 200$ million by much, but I think it will cross over...just barely.

I doubt it...it's only on about 330 or so screens right now. It might make about $400,000 Mon-Fri and maybe another $400,000 over the New Year weekend taking it over $197m...but it will dwindle down badly after that. SPECTRE is now just a fart lost in the Star Wars hurricane....

You may be right. Could be worse, though. Whose bright idea was it to "reboot" POINT BREAK and then place it in STAR WARS' cross-hairs? The original Point Break wasn't even a hit.

Bitchcraft wrote: wrote:

$850 might not be a failure but it's a whole $1/4 billion short of its predecessor. The bean counters are going to be cussing when Bond 25 comes around, no way they're spending another SPECTRE type budget....

It's a disappointment when you stop to consider that of all the previous Bond actors to do 4 films, the fourth was always the biggest film for them, building upon the breakout success of their third film (though, in Brosnan's case, his first three films did very close to one another in overall box office). SPECTRE actually takes a step backward for the franchise financially, and leaves the Craig-universe in a tough spot creatively.

SPECTRE is also a case study in financial management. Where exactly did the money go? There weren't that many action set pieces. The shut down Rome, so I guess that costs some money, but ultimately it was all for a rather antiseptic, too clean, standoff-ish feeling car chase (with some very expensive cars). The train fight sequence looked as if it were filmed in studio, so where'd that money go? The set piece in Austria was rather uninspiring, but I guess going out to a remote location in the snow cost money.

I think the biggest financial drains on the series were actually Craig and Mendes. I bet you that was $40 million spent right there.

One thing I found interesting about SPECTRE was that since they didn't have a location-dependent script, why did they make the choice to go to any of those locations when locations around the world that have never been used could have been worked into the script this time. For example, the PTS could have been shot anyway. Why not film that over the waterfront property of Sydney Australia? Yeah, technically Bond had not been to Mexico before, but we all know where LTK was filmed.

Basically, SONY spent close to $300 million dollars to take us to places we've already been before...to tell us a story nobody was asking for...with characters nobody was surprised to find in the film. Total waste of time and money SPECTRE is.

bitchcraft wrote:

Maybe Craig will join the cast of STAR WARS and get a light-saber up his ass. He deserves it after his tantrum in the press....

He already did ... he cameos as a Stormtrooper in The Force Awakens.

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

Jack Wade wrote:

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

Was SPECTRE a damn good film? Nope. It did earn the 'damn' part though.

Not sure how you expect me to dish out the proverbial rose for a film that just doesn't deserve it. When I want a BOND fix, I'll be dipping into the blu-ray set...but I'm in no hurry to see SPECTRE anytime soon.

bitchcraft wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

Was SPECTRE a damn good film? Nope. It did earn the 'damn' part though.

Not sure how you expect me to dish out the proverbial rose for a film that just doesn't deserve it. When I want a BOND fix, I'll be dipping into the blu-ray set...but I'm in no hurry to see SPECTRE anytime soon.

I didn't say Spectre was a damn good film but I do not think it anywhere near as awful as it's made out to be around here.

Andy nobody needs to dish out roses. There's just no need to act like Spectre is a failure because it's going to finish at $850 million worldwide or so.

I think it's almost as good as the likes of YOLT… Stylistic, but some stupid plot contrivances… But YOLT is clearly better.

Jack Wade wrote:

There's just no need to act like Spectre is a failure because it's going to finish at $850 million worldwide or so.

If you look at it in total isolation, $850 million is a very healthy return - even before you take into consideration the critical savaging that it got Stateside.

Jack Wade wrote:

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

London Olympics??? Riiiiiiight. Because when everyone thinks SKYFALL they immediately think of the embarrassing opening and closing Olympic ceremony.

$850 million is about 300 million more than CR and QOS averaged, and only 250 million short of SF, so I think if it says anything, it shows what Bond *could* do. Maybe that billion dollar box office wasn't such an outlier after all. I see no reason why SPECTRE, if made properly, couldn't have made more than SF. You sound like George Lucas blaming other people's expectations as too high for justifying why the prequel trilogy was garbage; SPECTRE was garbage pure and simple and it's lesser box office take reflects that reality.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

London Olympics??? Riiiiiiight. Because when everyone thinks SKYFALL they immediately think of the embarrassing opening and closing Olympic ceremony.

No, the London Olympics were part of a zeitgeist of pride that helped propel Skyfall to record numbers.

Quote :

$850 million is about 300 million more than CR and QOS averaged, and only 250 million short of SF, so I think if it says anything, it shows what Bond *could* do. Maybe that billion dollar box office wasn't such an outlier after all. I see no reason why SPECTRE, if made properly, couldn't have made more than SF.  You sound like George Lucas blaming other people's expectations as too high for justifying why the prequel trilogy was garbage; SPECTRE was garbage pure and simple and it's lesser box office take reflects that reality.

Nothing reflects garbage like $850 million in box office receipts.

Jack Wade wrote:

Nothing reflects garbage like $850 million in box office receipts.

Furious 7 made $1.5billion, so does that make it the better film?

SPECTRE has earned only a 64%-65% positive rating....that's why its staying power was not as great as its predecessor. Sure, you can say $850m is a great total, many films would love to earn that...but ultimately, I am positive a better Bond film would have earned more.

Jack Wade wrote:

Quite a bit of hyperbole here. In hindsight, it was foolish to expect Spectre to match what Skyfall did. Skyfall's success was the result of a perfect storm: 50th anniversary, London Olympics, and a damn good film. The fact that Spectre is sitting at $850 million worldwide is still impressive and is only a "disappointment" because it followed up what will end up being a probable outlier.

The unwarranted doom and gloom around here is really making it harder and harder to justify sticking around.

True. It's about as much of a "failure" as You Only Live Twice was after Thunderball, considering the series' history at the box office. The only thing that would make it worrisome is if it dipped in a manner similar to how the mid-to-late 80s films did.

Jack Wade wrote:

No, the London Olympics were part of a zeitgeist of pride that helped propel Skyfall to record numbers.

So Germans, French, Chinese and Americans were filled with "pride" because London held the Olympics and that led to box office records for Bond in those markets? I guess we were all filled with pride that Margaret Thatcher was the PM back in '79, because surely that must explain why Moonraker became Roger Moore's biggest hit.

Quote :

Nothing reflects garbage like $850 million in box office receipts.

Hmmm...money = quality. So that's why DAD is so critically beloved.

Connery...Moore...Brosnan...all built up momentum and cache between their 3rd and 4th films; they established their identity in their roles and the public made their 3rd and 4th films the biggest of their tenures. SPECTRE *should* have done better because it *should* have been better. $300 million should NOT have bought us the crap that we got. $850 million is nothing to sneeze at, but I'm certain there are not a few people at SONY and EON who look at the receipts and see a missed opportunity.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

No, the London Olympics were part of a zeitgeist of pride that helped propel Skyfall to record numbers.

So Germans, French, Chinese and Americans were filled with "pride" because London held the Olympics and that led to box office records for Bond in those markets? I guess we were all filled with pride that Margaret Thatcher was the PM back in '79, because surely that must explain why Moonraker became Roger Moore's biggest hit.

You're either being purposefully obtuse or failing to grab elementary marketing and publicity concepts. 2012 was a perfect storm for Bond, and pretending as if putting the star of your franchise in the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympics, something millions of people are watching at essentially the same time, coupled with the marketing machine of the 50th anniversary, didn't drum up hype for the picture is ridiculous.

Quote :

Quote :

Nothing reflects garbage like $850 million in box office receipts.

Hmmm...money = quality. So that's why DAD is so critically beloved.

No, but acting as if the film is a shitstain on the Bond canon because it fell $150 million short of $1 billion and got lukewarm reviews is hyperbole, and the constant, unwarranted sky-is-falling bitching and moaning that's resulted is becoming cumbersome and cancerous.

Jack Wade wrote:

No, but acting as if the film is a shitstain on the Bond canon because it fell $150 million short of $1 billion and got lukewarm reviews is hyperbole, and the constant, unwarranted sky-is-falling bitching and moaning that's resulted is becoming cumbersome and cancerous.

It's not hyerbole, it's looking at an opportunity that got wasted simply because SPECTRE delivers a damp squib instead of a solid Bond blockbuster.

Its 65% positive rating instead of one in excess of 90% should tell you it's a disappointment.

For my next Bond fix, I'll be picking up a Dalton film instead of SPECTRE...

A 65% rating with $850 does not even come close to the kind of lows this series reached in its 50+ years.

Makeshift Python wrote:

A 65% rating with $850 does not even come close to the kind of lows this series reached in its 50+ years.

Most series would love to have an $850 million dollar problem, but SPECTRE is almost like the Big Mac of movies: tons of empty calories. And not really even satisfying either.

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 made money, but even SONY felt that with all that money, something was off. Same with SPECTRE. $300 million dollars didn't buy them a whole lot, and that $850 million dollars would look a lot nicer if they'd spent less on the movie and gotten more bang for their buck.

What was "off" with THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 was that it's the weakest film in the series both critically and financially. It was also continuing a downward slope in the series' popularity, thus something radical had to be done to keep it going and be under Sony's ownership, as the Marc Webb/Andrew Garfield run was clearly not picking up. It's absurd to claim SPECTRE is facing the same scenario, especially since it made much more money than TASM2 in total so far. I do agree they could have made more of a profit had they not spend so much money, but that's their fault for not recognizing that SKYFALL was ultimately a fluke for the series much like GOLDFINGER and THUNDERBALL were. Under a more controlled budget, they'll do fine as the series has done in the past 50 years.

Anyway, whatever news is up for Bond 25, it's expected that something will be announced in February regarding a new partnership with another studio after Sony's has expired.

SPECTRE's $197m take was just enough to make the USA TOP 10 box-office movies of 2015, at #10

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2015&p=.htm

It should add another $400k-600k this weekend, it's still playing in over 300 theatres.