SPECTRE | 11/6/15 | Final Trailer on Page 126! | Twitter reactions coming in, STID 2.0?

[Asyulus]

Really? I dont care about the tracking.

Tracking always underestimate the OW predict.

Forget the tracking guys.

[Heretic]

A cinema in Wimbledon is showing this 33 times on a TUESDAY.

How big di they expect this thing to be. I don't think there's been as much hype for this compared to Skyfall.

That or Kingston Odeon is my local. 

 

Considering Skyfall was the first film to top £100m at the UK BO, 33 is fine. There are films that have had that many in the past, or even more. Vue Westfield has 50. Plus, it's half term, so it'll be playing huge to families. 

Edited October 21, 2015 by Heretic

[MrFanaticGuy34]

Hmm?...Box office-wise, is this going the FF6-way or the Hobbit 2-way?

[Burgess]

The trouble isn't the 75-80m, it's that tracking is decreasing.

That's assuming there's no margin of error.

 

Deadline's tracking could be on par to what the Wrap reported. $75-80 Million or $80+ Million. The most reliable number between these two estimates is $80 Million. So, if Spectre is on target for an $80 Million opening, then good reviews and another two weeks of marketing could push that higher. 

 

 

The early tracking for MI: Rogue Nation was off by $15 Million.

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/box-office-early-tracking-soft-for-mission-impossible-1201541833/

Edited October 21, 2015 by Burgess

[Goffe]

It serves them right if they loose money with this, like for real, how a Bond film cost fucking 350m?

The movie would still loose a big chunk of money if it made "only" 800m WW.

And that's a very optimistic prediction.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Goffe

[Burgess]

It serves them right if they loose money with this, like for real, how a Bond film cost fucking 350m?

The movie would still loose a big chunk of money if it made "only" 800m WW.

That's a jaundiced way of looking at it.

 

The Bond films are one of the only franchises that can still claim to do the majority of stunts for real. $300 M+ is a lot of money, but they put a lot of that on the screen. Spectre actually recreated the Day of the Dead festival in Mexico City, and shot a car chase in the middle of Rome. Who wishes failure on a film because of its budget? Who cares (aside from the studio) as long as the film is entertaining? 

Edited October 21, 2015 by Burgess

[Filmovie]

Screens to press tonight UK time so by around 4/5pm ET we'll get reviews.

 

Really? So reviews in a few hours? 

 

I thought I had to wait till 26th

[SchumacherFTW]

It serves them right if they loose money with this, like for real, how a Bond film cost fucking 350m?

The movie would still loose a big chunk of money if it made "only" 800m WW.

And that's a very optimistic prediction.

Think about the absurd amount of product placement that each film uses and it probably offsets almost half that amount. It's almost a drinking game at this point trying to see the different products.

[Goffe]

Who wishes failure on a film because of its budget? Who cares (aside from the studio) as long as the film is entertaining?

I'm not wishing a failure, I just won't be disappointed when Spectre fails to recoup its budget+marketing, like I do when a quality movie fails.

Think about the absurd amount of product placement that each film uses and it probably offsets almost half that amount. It's almost a drinking game at this point trying to see the different products.

I think they are doing it wrong if they have to rely on product placement to not lose money.

They must learn to work with a smaller budget, starting cutting the huge fees mentioned in this thread. If the movie makes a sizable profit, then the budget will go even higher in the next installment, and when the franchises crashes, it will crash even harder.

Besides, I think 350m is reserved for very specific kind of movies (Gore Verbinski says hi ), and a James Bond movie is not one of them.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Goffe

[Hatebox]

The 350m figure is crazy (and therefore probably not true), but with the amount of location shooting the franchise is known for Bond films will always be bloody expensive. As Craig said in that now semi-famous interview, they really don't make movies like this anymore.

[Burgess]

I'm not wishing a failure, I just won't be disappointed when Spectre fails to recoup its budget+marketing, like I do when a quality movie fails.

I think they are doing it wrong if they have to rely on product placement to not lose money.

They must learn to work with a smaller budget, starting cutting the huge fees mentioned in this thread. If the movie makes a sizable profit, then the budget will go even higher in the next installment, and when the franchises crashes, it will crash even harder.

Besides, I think 350m is reserved for very specific kind of movies (Gore Verbinski says hi ), and a James Bond movie is not one of them.

So, Spectre isn't a quality movie? You've seen it? You know the blow-by-blow of what happens in the movie? Your posts sound bitter. Are you a SONY exec?

[TalismanRing]

The 350m figure is crazy (and therefore probably not true), but with the amount of location shooting the franchise is known for Bond films will always be bloody expensive. As Craig said in that now semi-famous interview, they really don't make movies like this anymore.

 

The figure comes straight from the leaked Sony e-mails with them complaining about the enormous budget and begging Broccoli to cut it but she shoots down every idea from filming a scene in the rain, using fewer train cars to using a location closer to home for a small scene.

[Hatebox]

The figure comes straight from the leaked Sony e-mails with them complaining about the enormous budget and begging Broccoli to cut it but she shoots down every idea from filming a scene in the rain, using fewer train cars to using a location closer to home for a small scene.

 

I emailed Sony Pictures a couple of days ago and they replied 'That was a typo: the emails meant to say 150m. Sorry for the confusion.'

[Goffe]

Dp

Edited October 21, 2015 by Goffe

[antovolk]

[Goffe]

So, Spectre isn't a quality movie? You've seen it? You know the blow-by-blow of what happens in the movie? Your posts sound bitter. Are you a SONY exec?

what? I'm implied that Spectre will be a good movie.

I said I won't be disappointed if Spectre loses money because of its huge budget, it's a financial trainwreck waiting to happen. That says nothing about what I think of the movie, I'm actually very excited about it, planning to buy a ticket in advance just to get a mini poster of the movie.

Reality is bitter.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Goffe

[CoolioD1]

I must admit I ecspectred tracking to be better.

[Goffe]

I must admit I ecspectred tracking to be better.

[stuart360]

Did people really expect this to do better than Skyfall?, that film had the anniversary factor and that WAS a factor for some people as i know people who went to see Skyfall because of that, people that hadn't seen a Bond in cinemas for years.

[Jonwo]

The figure comes straight from the leaked Sony e-mails with them complaining about the enormous budget and begging Broccoli to cut it but she shoots down every idea from filming a scene in the rain, using fewer train cars to using a location closer to home for a small scene.

 

Bond has always been expensive to shoot and the fact they have such a tight shooting schedule likely means the budget will increase. QoS shot without a finished script and it really shows.

 

There's an interesting article in THR about Sony's involvement with Spectre and it does seem it's just as important to them to try and keep it as it would for MGM. 

 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/how-sony-could-lose-james-833474

Edited October 21, 2015 by Jonwo