Jump to content
Neo

No Time To Die | October 8 2021 | 82% on RT | RIP Sean Connery

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Burgess said:

To put it another way, do you imagine the U.S. President opening the LA Olympic ceremony in 2028 with Iron Man or Thor?

 

If some of the recent US president are an indication, I think you can go extremely wild here in your imagination, it could have been Kid Rock or Ted Nugent on a bed of guns.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Burgess said:

By that logic no film in any preceding decade could ever really be considered a success in and of itself. We can't make a proper assessment of the popularity of "Star Wars" because it was made in 1977 and not 2017. Was "The Exorcist" even successful since it was made 50 years ago?

You are reading what he said wrong. You can't compare the two different era performance just with inflation adjustment, nothing to do with degree of success of them. Back in that era, theaters used to be only place to watch a movie for a long long time, till the movie premiered on TV.

 

The first hit box office took was TV, then home video and in time streaming, etc with lowest window in history.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of takes, I think Skyfall is just good & best of Craig era films. I didn't like Casino Royale at all, though I watched it long time ago.

 

May be now it may get better for me but even thinking about it, seems like really dumb film.

Edited by charlie Jatinder
  • Like 1
  • Disbelief 1
  • Not Cool 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, charlie Jatinder said:

You can't compare the two different era performance just with inflation adjustment,

Has always very true, but under any metric Connery Bond was extremely popular in 64-65:

 

1 Mary Poppins Aug 26, 1964 Walt Disney Musical $102,272,145 109,970,048
2 My Fair Lady Oct 22, 1964   Musical $72,000,000 77,419,354
3 Goldfinger Dec 22, 1964 MGM Action $51,100,000 54,946,236
4 The Carpetbaggers Apr 9, 1964 Paramount Pictures Drama $28,409,547 30,547,900
5 From Russia With Love Apr 8, 1964 MGM Action $24,800,000

26,666,66

 

 

 

 

1 The Sound of Music Mar 2, 1965 20th Century Fox Musical $163,214,286 161,598,302
2 Doctor Zhivago Dec 22, 1965 MGM Drama $111,721,913 110,615,755
3 Thunderball Dec 29, 1965 MGM Action $63,600,000 62,970,297
4 Those Magnificent Men In Th… Jun 16, 1965   Adventure $31,111,111 30,803,080
5 That Darn Cat! Dec 2, 1965   Comedy $28,062,222 27,784,378
6 The Great Race Jul 1, 1965   Comedy $25,333,333

25,082,507

 

 

That putting 2 movie in the Top 3 2 year<s in a row and a third one at number 5 domestic while being a smash intl, enough for someone to pause a little bit before saying that this era Craig is when it was at is most popular (even if it has an argument for it).

 

I think it is the number 2-3 movies worldwide those 2 year<s behind the Sound of Music one of the biggest movie ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

May be now it may get better for me but even thinking about it, seems like really dumb film.

 

I doubt it, Casino Royal has a good argument to have been at is best on is first watch and the first watch being close to 2006.

 

Sequence like the Poker game is just too long on rewatch and I would imagine on first watch now that we are out of the peak madness of poker popularity that we were back in those days, the action-fight sequence being more realistic-gritty became more the norm and so on.

 

I feel it would still be my favorite, but I need to rewatch Skyfall one day.

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Has always very true, but under any metric Connery Bond was extremely popular in 64-65

I had no quarrel on the statement Craig bond being biggest or not, I was only pointing at the fact inflation adj isn't best measure.

 

The method you used of ranking is better, basically Bond was 40-50% of top films of that year which will be $200-350M today, as top movie today is usually $500-700M.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

basically Bond was 40-50% of top films of that year

domestic, worldwide it was above anything that was not a giant like Sound of music all time event type if I am not misunderstanding, and that was while they pushed out 3 Bond movie in only 2 year's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

You are reading what he said wrong. You can't compare the two different era performance just with inflation adjustment, nothing to do with degree of success of them. Back in that era, theaters used to be only place to watch a movie for a long long time, till the movie premiered on TV.

 

The first hit box office took was TV, then home video and in time streaming, etc with lowest window in history.

 

This is a quote from his original post:

 

"Bond has been on screen for 60 years and its never been as commercially successful as it is now with the Craig iteration"

 

Showing adjusted figures speaks to this not being true. Most films from the 60's don't appear on any competitive lists for inflation-adjusted grosses even though they existed within the same ecosystem as the Connery Bond films.

 

Inflation is not the only metric used in judging a film's popularity, but tickets sold and relative box office gross are ways in which "commercially successful" can be quantified. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

I had no quarrel on the statement Craig bond being biggest or not, I was only pointing at the fact inflation adj isn't best measure.

 

The method you used of ranking is better, basically Bond was 40-50% of top films of that year which will be $200-350M today, as top movie today is usually $500-700M.

 

What would you use to quantify "commercially successful?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Burgess said:

What would you use to quantify "commercially successful?"

Commercially successful is different thing than comparing magnitude of box office. A film with $2M budget and $10M revenue is success but $150M budget and $100M revenue isn't.

 

As for comparing two films of different era, I think comparing how they compete with others in that era is better measure than simple inflation adjustment. Skyfall was no. 4 film of 2012 at US box office, being about half of #1 The Avengers, which seems around where Goldfinger and Thunderball were as shared by @Barnack.

 

Again I am not saying that Craig era is more successful or less, I am not into Bond or old Hollywood data, but "comparing with other films of same era" metric against inflation adj., I stand by.

Edited by charlie Jatinder
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back Skyfall was 40th biggest grosser in Domestic market at time of release, being about 40% gross (45% admits) of the top film at time i.e. Avatar $750M & 70M admits.

 

The best inflation adjusted Bond film, Thunderball was probably in Top 20 grossers at time, being ~40% of gross biggest film of that era, Sound of Music. 

 

So that's about peak of James Bond in US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

James Bond was enormous during Sean Connery's reign. 

 

Tickets sold in US

 

1963 Dr No 19M  (budget 1M) #7 movie gross for the year

1964 From Russia With Love 26.6M (budget 2M) #5 movie of the year

1964 Goldfinger 55M (budget 3M) #3 movie of the year

1965 Thunderball   63M (budget 9M) #3 movie of the year

 

compared to Daniel Craig

 

2006  Casino Royale 23M (budget 100M) #9 movie of the year

2008 QoS 23M (budget 230M) #9 movie of the year

2012 Skyfall 37M (budget 200M) #4 movie of the year

2015 Spectre 23M (budget 300M) #11 movie of the year

 

Craig has revitalized Bond no doubt but they are not the p[phenomenon they were in the 1960s under Connery who churned then out in quick succession and with low budgets in the first 3 and made insane profits.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problematic™ moments aside, Skyfall is good because it has a lean plot, and you're rarely asking 'why are these people here' or 'why is this person doing this'.

 

I've been watching a lot of the older movies as they've been on tv recently and come to the conclusion that the foundation for a decent Bond movie is simply: do I understand what the hell is going on. It's certainly not a given for each entry. I'm not entirely convinced Diamonds Are Forever had a script.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished watching QoS. Now I have seen all Craig Bond movies. Bond ain't my cup of tea. Action scenes are bad and plots are. Skyfall and Spectre have better action of the lot. Ethan Hunt FTW.

 

Skyfall - 3/5
Spectre - 2.5/5
CS - 2/5

QoS - 1/5

  • ...wtf 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.