152 replies to this topic

[Tarl_Cabot]

who dusted off this thread?

Reminds me how much I miss Jaelle and kristian.

[00Twelve]

I think Americans love Bond, and easily as much as other nations (maybe not England...maybe). Moderators, it would be very interesting to create a poll on which continent everyone is from, and they can list their home nation, if they want.

[tonymascia1]

I love this topic...

For all the time and effort EON has put into the series, the U.S. box office "underperformed" until Goldeneye.

Best guess? We Yanks find it harder to embrace heroes more sophisticated than the Die Hard/Lethal Weapon types. We seem to prefer blunt one-liners, to true wit and charm; a Bud, rather than a Vodka Martini. A shame --- but it DOES leave me with little competition bidding for The Saint or The Avengers DVDs on eBay...

[moorebond82]

Well this american loves james bond.

[Death for breakfast]

I'm also a american and a huge bond fan. But the Bond movies dont always underperform at the US box office. In 2002 DAD was the 12th grossing film of the year which isnt that bad for one of the lesser bond movies

[DanMan]

Every new Bond flick always seems to end up among the top five biggest grossers of its year internationally, while barely scraping into the US Top 10.

Basically, what I'm saying is that Bond's popularity in America seems to be but a shadow of its popularity elsewhere. Were it not for its enormous international popularity, I don't see that the Bond franchise would be viable. The US market alone wouldn't be big enough to support it, and I don't believe that one can say the same for other franchises.

Home-grown action/adventure franchises (BAD BOYS, DIE HARD, LETHAL WEAPON, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE, RUSH HOUR, THE TERMINATOR, etc. etc.) seem to go through the roof at the US box office in a way that Bond doesn't.

And I still feel this way. It's relatively early days, of course, but it's far from a sure thing that CASINO ROYALE (current US gross as reported by Box Office Mojo: $115,876,024) will enter this year's American Top 10.

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III has taken $133,501,348 this year at cinemas Stateside, while 2004's THE BOURNE SUPREMACY pulled in $176,241,941. Two recent franchise films popularly regarded as flops, BATMAN BEGINS and SUPERMAN RETURNS, managed $205,343,774 and $200,081,192 respectively.

Once again, Bond seems to be doing reasonable, but certainly not spectacular, business in the US of A, and this is with the novelty factor of a new (and highly acclaimed) face in the role, well over a year of very heavy free publicity, and easily the best reviews the series has ever had. Strikes me that America still prefers its own franchises.

Thoughts?

CR is on track to outrgross MI:III by at least $20-30 million. If anything it'll only lose to The Bourne Supremacy by a couple of million. CR features an entirely foreign cast, foreign crew, and is a radically different than the cliche Bond films that audience's have grown used to over the past thirty+ years.

The fact that it's doing just as well as the last four films in the U.S. and on course to exceed DAD's domestic take goes to show that the franchise is in damn good shape in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

[DaveBond21]

Interesting post. I always wonder this too, as in the UK, we always got a lot of Bond stuff on TV, the movies, interviews, news stories and documentaries, and I wondered if the US gets the same hype surrounding the Bond movies.

[bill007]

This thread certainly had a good run in 2003. Well done Loomis.

I, as a Yank and Bond fan, envy you guys in the U.K. There is always something surfacing Bond related. Like that Dame Judi TV show, "As Time Goes By," I remember an episode I watched recently (here in the USA), where some guy pulls up in a car and imitated Connery's voice saying something to the effect of "Powered by a shmall nuclear device."

Back on subject, though...We Yanks love 007, too. All numbers aside, we have passed him on to three generations now, and he is still a favorite.

[SilencedPPK]

It seems to me, that not many people around where I live (utah) like James Bond. I really enjoy it, and I have converted my step siblings to Bond, and it's great! i took them to see Casino Royale, and now they are interested in the entire series. It's great, cuz they will probably pass it onto their friends. Hopefully the growth will start soon! America doesn't seem as hyped on the 007 thing, which makes sense cuz Bond is British. But at least I love Bond! I think that's all that matters!

[ChronoBreak]

In my experience, growing up in the USA, Bond is popular - But it's more the idea of Bond rather than the films themselves that people get attached to. The perception of Bond is gadgets, gadgets, gadgets, and nude silouhetted women set to pop songs. In the weeks before CR, I think a lot of people (at least, in my region) were confounded by the classical approach to the material.

Once in a while I come across a Bond fan who is actually worth his or her salt, but they seem very few and far between over here.

Viva CBN, though. Easily the friendliest, most intelligent and interesting collection of Bond fans I've encountered.

[SilencedPPK]

Here. Here.

[MarcAngeDraco]

Viva CBN, though. Easily the friendliest, most intelligent and interesting collection of Bond fans I've encountered.

I absolutely agree!!

[doublenoughtspy]

Rather than box office - I'll take a look at Bond fandom and scholarship.

1st Bond fan club - American (Bondage).

1st Bond website - American Kimberly Last's site.

Bond DVD producer - American John Cork.

Most recent continuation author - American Raymond Benson.

CBn's admin team - 7 out of 16 are Americans.

So yes, we seriously love Bond here in the states!

[HildebrandRarity]

No...i think youre being much too general (not incorrectly so), loomis.

point:

T3 is likley to gross LESS than DAD...almost a fact...wait and see!

Die Hard (with a vengence) released in '95, grossed $US 100M...LESS than GoldenEye's US$106M (domestic)...that's a fact, my friend.

Lethal Weapon 4, released in '98, grossed 130 mil...the average of TND and TWINE in '97 and '99 were not too dis-similiar.

as for rush hour and bad boys...hav'nt seen 'em ...and besides, WHO CARES!!!...i certainly dont!!!!!

so i think bond still is significant:

Finally:

DAD US$160 mil (US domestic)....XXX (i believe) us$ 144 mil.

bond ruled over it. bourne identity and sum of all fears didnt even come close!!!


ya see my point?

What Ray T said.

But now that we have a new Bond film and can further compare...CR beat the living daylights out of MI:III and XXX 2, didnt it? and Supremacy may have done a tad better but I think you can put it down to 'name actor' more than anything.

[Jim]

No...i think youre being much too general (not incorrectly so), loomis.

point:

T3 is likley to gross LESS than DAD...almost a fact...wait and see!

Die Hard (with a vengence) released in '95, grossed $US 100M...LESS than GoldenEye's US$106M (domestic)...that's a fact, my friend.

Lethal Weapon 4, released in '98, grossed 130 mil...the average of TND and TWINE in '97 and '99 were not too dis-similiar.

as for rush hour and bad boys...hav'nt seen 'em ...and besides, WHO CARES!!!...i certainly dont!!!!!

so i think bond still is significant:

Finally:

DAD US$160 mil (US domestic)....XXX (i believe) us$ 144 mil.

bond ruled over it. bourne identity and sum of all fears didnt even come close!!!


ya see my point?

What Ray T said.

But you are ray t.

So this proves nothing. Nothing. Except the old adage that a crippled dog must limp back to its own product.

[HildebrandRarity]

anyway...i think in connery times we did not have 87 television channels from which to choose, no video/computer games, no dvd rentals, no internet, and less holidaying than we now do in north america.

in addition, its hard to be original after 20 movies and within a genre that has begged borrowed and stolen from bond itself...but they are trying...so lets give 'em some slack...

And now there's 187 channels, hand held computer games also, direct to internet piracy, and everyone can get a cheap vacation at the click of a button.

And, o, it's good to know that SOME people still had faith in them about trying to be more original and were willing to give the Eon folk some slack.

Paid off, dintit?

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 10 February 2007 - 07:34 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

No...i think youre being much too general (not incorrectly so), loomis.

point:

T3 is likley to gross LESS than DAD...almost a fact...wait and see!

Die Hard (with a vengence) released in '95, grossed $US 100M...LESS than GoldenEye's US$106M (domestic)...that's a fact, my friend.

Lethal Weapon 4, released in '98, grossed 130 mil...the average of TND and TWINE in '97 and '99 were not too dis-similiar.

as for rush hour and bad boys...hav'nt seen 'em ...and besides, WHO CARES!!!...i certainly dont!!!!!

so i think bond still is significant:

Finally:

DAD US$160 mil (US domestic)....XXX (i believe) us$ 144 mil.

bond ruled over it. bourne identity and sum of all fears didnt even come close!!!


ya see my point?

What Ray T said.

But you are ray t.

So this proves nothing. Nothing. Except the old adage that a crippled dog must limp back to its own product.

Well, i'm eternally greatful that you kind folk let me return...As you can see, i'm behaving myself nicely...even tried to goad some of the anti-Craig brigade into effectively donating $1000 to CBn (or to Mrs. Jim)...and (And) i've improved my writing too (I think).

God bless you Jim...And God bless all the kind folk at CommanderBond.net

[Jim]

Mrs Jim's need for good shoes prevents a proper response.

Joseph Debach

Vicolo del Cinque 19 (Trastevere)

Tel./Fax: +39 06 5562756

[Loomis]

No...i think youre being much too general (not incorrectly so), loomis.

point:

T3 is likley to gross LESS than DAD...almost a fact...wait and see!

Die Hard (with a vengence) released in '95, grossed $US 100M...LESS than GoldenEye's US$106M (domestic)...that's a fact, my friend.

Lethal Weapon 4, released in '98, grossed 130 mil...the average of TND and TWINE in '97 and '99 were not too dis-similiar.

as for rush hour and bad boys...hav'nt seen 'em ...and besides, WHO CARES!!!...i certainly dont!!!!!

so i think bond still is significant:

Finally:

DAD US$160 mil (US domestic)....XXX (i believe) us$ 144 mil.

bond ruled over it. bourne identity and sum of all fears didnt even come close!!!


ya see my point?

What Ray T said.

But now that we have a new Bond film and can further compare...CR beat the living daylights out of MI:III and XXX 2, didnt it? and Supremacy may have done a tad better but I think you can put it down to 'name actor' more than anything.

I dunno. Is Matt Damon all that much of a box office star (when not playing Bourne; see also: Brosnan when not playing Bond)? At any rate, he's a lot less of a name than Tom Cruise, surely?

I'm not sure what I'd put BOURNE 2's success down to, but what I will say is that, considering how dark and gritty it is (much more so than CASINO ROYALE), its box office performance was truly remarkable.

Looking at last year's US top 10 as reported on Box Office Mojo, it would appear that CR was 2006's highest grossing non-fantasy/non-superhero action movie. To get a US gross of $200 million plus, it seems that 007 needs to be given magical powers like Batman, Superman or the X-Men rather than Q Branch gadgets.

BTW, does anyone know of a list of the top 10 highest grossers at the international box office last year and whereabouts CR is on it? (Can't seem to find such a list on Box Office Mojo.)

[HildebrandRarity]

Mrs Jim's need for good shoes prevents a proper response.

Joseph Debach

Vicolo del Cinque 19 (Trastevere)

Tel./Fax: +39 06 5562756

Ahh!

You and the likes of Loomis were such good fun and such good debate in the good 'ole days of '01 and '02...and I do quite miss the likes of Xenobia and Mourning Becomes Electra and some of the others who've dissappeared for one reason or other. Best wishes to all of 'em...but i'm happy to be back, Jim...and I do indeed intend to keep behaving myself.

:-)

[HildebrandRarity]

Looking at last year's US top 10 as reported on Box Office Mojo, it would appear that CR was 2006's highest grossing non-fantasy/non-superhero action movie. To get a US gross of $200 million plus, it seems that 007 needs to be given magical powers like Batman, Superman or the X-Men rather than Q Branch gadgets.

BTW, does anyone know of a list of the top 10 highest grossers at the international box office last year and whereabouts CR is on it? (Can't seem to find such a list on Box Office Mojo.)

Ya, in the US you need to be a talking animal/bird/fish(/and now, car) OR a wizard/witch/evil magician OR a comic book superstud to guarantee $200-plus. This year Da Vinci bucked that trend...unless, of course, the American movie-going public considers Jesus Christ to be in the ultimate superstar (Mel Gibson's The Passion Of The Christ?) category...or a category of His own.

Anyway, Loomis, to answer your question, go here:

http://www.boxofficeguru.com/intl.htm

Box Office Guru's International page.

It shows Casino Royale FIRMLY at number 4 Internationally and about number 9 on the domestic scale.

Note also that of all the movies, Casino Royale's domestic percentage is the lowest of all the releases and it's International percentage is number 1 thanks to the likes of England/UK and Denmark backing Craig and Mikklesen to the hilt and the addition of the likes of India and China and new old Eastern Bloc countries.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 10 February 2007 - 08:37 PM.

[Loomis]

Ya, in the US you need to be a talking animal/bird/fish(/and now, car) OR a wizard/witch/evil magician OR a comic book superstud to guarantee $200-plus. This year Da Vinci and Pirates bucked that trend.

I haven't seen it (nor do I wish to), but isn't PIRATES a film with magic/supernatural elements?

But, yeah, $200 mil plus seems the almost exclusive province of kids' movies and wizard, witch, superhero and so on stuff.

It shows Casino Royale FIRMLY at number 4 Internationally and about number 9 on the domestic scale.

Thanks. It's great to see that CASINO ROYALE has caned the likes of the X-Men, Superman and those blasted penguins on an international basis.

[HildebrandRarity]

Ya, in the US you need to be a talking animal/bird/fish(/and now, car) OR a wizard/witch/evil magician OR a comic book superstud to guarantee $200-plus. This year Da Vinci and Pirates bucked that trend.

I haven't seen it (nor do I wish to), but isn't PIRATES a film with magic/supernatural elements?

Yes, sorry, modified.

Yes, I saw Pirates with my 10 year old and, yes, I forgot it had an octopusman thingy as well as a giant octopus thingy.

Reminds me...perhaps i'll stick good 'ole Octopussy into the DVD tonight...some good scenes but Roger looked quite old there and should have done some facial tucks a movie earlier.

[blackjack60]

Americans are not as classy as Europeans and other people around the world. America is a dressed down culture; our manners are casual.Good intentions and manners are not the same thing but most people don't know the difference. We don't have regular formal occasions.People here wear shorts and flip flops in 5 star hotels.

Very true. We're a rich country, but lately wealth seems to foster less sophistication in us, not more. That's a crude generalization of course, but I also think that American culture has been shifting over the decades to that dressed-down slobbery-over-snobbery ethic. The 60s were really the last decade when Americans aspired culturally "upward." James Bond was immensely popular because he was a virile, hard-hitting tough-guy who was also a bon-vivant. Americans don't grow up in a culture that encourages classiness anymore. We no longer have film stars like Cary Grant or William Powell. We no longer make comedies like Bringing Up Baby for a mass audience. Maybe it's because the country as a whole has gotten wealthier, and as people no longer strive toward an image of higher living and appearance, they grow content to be part of a massive well-of middle-class.
Our culture has also grown steadily more youth-oriented/enslaved. Movies like XXX embody widespread cultural attitudes when they sneer at secret agents in tuxedos but applaud those who go snowboarding. In other words, our culture is more and more trying to center itself around youth culture, whereas Bond is really oriented toward adult culture--Bond represents a fantasy about adult life, about growing to become the most exciting and savvy adult imaginable. And American culture no longer aspires to that ideal of growing up to be a smart, swinging, martini-sipping adult. That ideal breathed its last gasp with people like JFK (who was the first and last sophisticate President, and represented an ideal the nation later discarded--instead America gravitated to cornpone Southern governors and saccharine B-movie actors).
But the success of Casino Royale is heartening. By toughening up Bond and casting a muscled but not musclebound actor like Craig to play him, the franchise helps to align toughness and sophistication in people's minds. CR says that it's the modern, "hip" snowboarding spy who'll come apart like a microwaved creampuff when someone whacks his genitals. It takes a hard-liver like Bond to survive--someone who rewards himself with life's classiest pleasures in return for undergoing its hardest trials. And that concept goes straight to the heart of Ian Fleming's original vision.

The majority of America listens to country music and drives a pick up truck. So, the blue collar heroes tend to be bigger at the box office. This is only my theory...

I don't know about pick-ups, but country music is still the biggest genre sales-wise. I don't know why, since it's been artistically dead for several decades.

[HildebrandRarity]

Americans are not as classy as Europeans and other people around the world. America is a dressed down culture; our manners are casual.Good intentions and manners are not the same thing but most people don't know the difference. We don't have regular formal occasions.People here wear shorts and flip flops in 5 star hotels.

Very true. We're a rich country, but lately wealth seems to foster less sophistication in us, not more. That's a crude generalization of course, but I also think that American culture has been shifting over the decades to that dressed-down slobbery-over-snobbery ethic. The 60s were really the last decade when Americans aspired culturally "upward." James Bond was immensely popular because he was a virile, hard-hitting tough-guy who was also a bon-vivant. Americans don't grow up in a culture that encourages classiness anymore. We no longer have film stars like Cary Grant or William Powell. We no longer make comedies like Bringing Up Baby for a mass audience. Maybe it's because the country as a whole has gotten wealthier, and as people no longer strive toward an image of higher living and appearance, they grow content to be part of a massive well-of middle-class.
Our culture has also grown steadily more youth-oriented/enslaved. Movies like XXX embody widespread cultural attitudes when they sneer at secret agents in tuxedos but applaud those who go snowboarding. In other words, our culture is more and more trying to center itself around youth culture, whereas Bond is really oriented toward adult culture--Bond represents a fantasy about adult life, about growing to become the most exciting and savvy adult imaginable. And American culture no longer aspires to that ideal of growing up to be a smart, swinging, martini-sipping adult. That ideal breathed its last gasp with people like JFK (who was the first and last sophisticate President, and represented an ideal the nation later discarded--instead America gravitated to cornpone Southern governors and saccharine B-movie actors).
But the success of Casino Royale is heartening. By toughening up Bond and casting a muscled but not musclebound actor like Craig to play him, the franchise helps to align toughness and sophistication in people's minds. CR says that it's the modern, "hip" snowboarding spy who'll come apart like a microwaved creampuff when someone whacks his genitals. It takes a hard-liver like Bond to survive--someone who rewards himself with life's classiest pleasures in return for undergoing its hardest trials. And that concept goes straight to the heart of Ian Fleming's original vision.

The majority of America listens to country music and drives a pick up truck. So, the blue collar heroes tend to be bigger at the box office. This is only my theory...

I don't know about pick-ups, but country music is still the biggest genre sales-wise. I don't know why, since it's been artistically dead for several decades.

Very intersting post. And as far as the last line goes, don't the concepts surrounding "artistcally dead" and "slobbery-over-snobbery" go (virtually) hand in hand?

[B5Erik]

To me, the biggest problem Bond's had in the U.S. is the, "been there, done that," feeling that a majority of American moviegoers have towards Bond movies.

I think it really hurt LTK when you were talking about 16 movies in a 27 year span. It was Bond oversaturation and marketing overkill.

The extended layoff before GE and the casting of the guy that the fans thought "should have" gotten the role for TLD brought more interest, but the Bond audience still didn't grow much as it became, "more of the same" to many of them, and they moved on to the next entertainment option.

CR may help build a new audience for Bond. The Bourne Identity did just over $100 Million, then the Bourne Supremacy built on that audience and did over $160 million. CR is a darker, more serious, better written movie than any of Brosnan's outings, and that may attract more fans next time out.

Or, Americans may not buy into Daniel Craig and it may be another LTK situation for Bond 22 - good worldwide numbers, but disappointing numbers Stateside. I know that there is still some resistance to Craig over here, so who knows what will happen?

There are a lot of Bond fans in the U.S. - but the series peaked in the 60's, had a revival in the late 70's, and slid down the priority list for most Americans after that. Like I said, "Been there, done that." EON & MGM need to excite the old fans with good material, and continue to put out fresh, well written and directed Bond movies to attract new fans.

The Bond "Phenomenon" has never gone away in America, but it has become a smaller thing.

Edited by B5Erik, 10 February 2007 - 11:07 PM.

[English Agent]

Yes, B5Erik.

Your post is exactly how i interpretated the reaction of the North American
public to the Bond movies, over the decades.

Edited by English Agent, 10 February 2007 - 11:07 PM.

[Turn]

To me, the biggest problem Bond's had in the U.S. is the, "been there, done that," feeling that a majority of American moviegoers have towards Bond movies.

I think it really hurt LTK when you were talking about 16 movies in a 27 year span. It was Bond oversaturation and marketing overkill.

The extended layoff before GE and the casting of the guy that the fans thought "should have" gotten the role for TLD brought more interest, but the Bond audience still didn't grow much as it became, "more of the same" to many of them, and they moved on to the next entertainment option.

CR may help build a new audience for Bond. The Bourne Identity did just over $100 Million, then the Bourne Supremacy built on that audience and did over $160 million. CR is a darker, more serious, better written movie than any of Brosnan's outings, and that may attract more fans next time out.

Or, Americans may not buy into Daniel Craig and it may be another LTK situation for Bond 22 - good worldwide numbers, but disappointing numbers Stateside. I know that there is still some resistance to Craig over here, so who knows what will happen?

There are a lot of Bond fans in the U.S. - but the series peaked in the 60's, had a revival in the late 70's, and slid down the priority list for most Americans after that. Like I said, "Been there, done that." EON & MGM need to excite the old fans with good material, and continue to put out fresh, well written and directed Bond movies to attract new fans.

The Bond "Phenomenon" has never gone away in America, but it has become a smaller thing.

I agree, good post. It seems like we're always looking for the next big thing. And with each layoff there seems to be a new younger group to introduce the series to.

Even when I was a kid back in the '80s Moore seemed like the antithesis of a cool action hero. I almost had to be a closet Bond fan as few people seemed to like the series back then. It was Rambo and Indiana Jones at the time. It will be interesting to see how the next Indy and Die Hard films do.

Through it all, Bond seems to endure. One of the series' advantages is still having that core group of older fans, many of whom rarely go to films. They'll turn out for Bond. If they can continue to bring in the younger fan base it helps, which seemed to be what happened both times I saw CR.

I live in Ohio and went to see CR the day of the Ohio State-Michigan game. When the film let out around 9:45 p.m., there was a huge line of mostly teens and twentysomethings who wanted to see the film after the game. That seemed encouraging at the time.

[DaveBond21]

Here. Here.

Hear Hear!

[RazorBlade]

I'm an American and huge Bond fan. Have been all my life. I'd like to add to B5Erik's comments.

It's more than "been there done that". We can be as loyal as anyone else when it comes to supporting a fav franchise. Someone earlier mentioned Star Wars as an example of an non-American product which is confusing since George Lucas is an American and makes the films from an American sensibility. I think that the 70's and 80's lost Bond for many of us except the Dalton films. I think that, as far is marketing is concerned, it was time to replace Broz, although I like him very well as Bond or any character he chooses to play.

The bottom line is that generally a Bond movie is more a character based fantasy film. Yes, Q, M, Moneypenney and the supervillains are on one level extensions of Bond's character. While American action films are more plot driven. That is until CASINO ROYALE and a more balanced Bond was introduced to us. Bond even had an American styled character arch in a thrill a minute event popcorn movie!

See, here in the US we study screenwriting like it's, well, a job. Fantasy films are different creatures than actioners. And for an American audience a fantasy film must be in an alternate universe. Try pitching a contemporary fantasy film to a studio and see how far that gets ya! Each genre, fantasy and action et al, have different plot points and story structure. Just read screenwriting teachers like McKay, or William Martell, or Turby, or Jeff Kitchens. They each have their ideas but I think they generally agree. While Bond seems like a action film on the surface I mantain that it is a fantasy franchise. No secret agent really behaves this way. And thank God and Ian Fleming for that!

There are big differences between plot driven films, such as NORTH BY NORTHWEST, Hitch's proto-bond film, and character driven films, such as OHMSS which really focused on Bond's character over action(it's also the reason why even Laz fans like me wish Connery had done that film and Laz DAF+ and still left room for Moore-ha, ha). Action naturally build excitment, which we are big on being a practical results based culture, while character builds interest in the film. Sadly, interesting action films don't sell.

I dispute that we Americans are slobs, that covers humanity in general, and so we can't "get" a gentlemen hero like Bond. And no, most Americans don't drive around in pick-ups listening to C/W music. We aren't culturally dead, but we do have giant multinational corporations that like to tell us what to listen to, Rap, and what to watch, xXx if they had their way, and what to think, on all the news channels.

Longer than I planned but I think I started to cover it.