49 replies to this topic

[luciusgore]

With King Kong posting disappointing box office, the film front has changed dramatically, and for CR to succeed, it will have to knock one out of the park, be one of the best Bond films in maybe 30 years. It will definitely need to be the best since Spy Who Loved Me, given that there's a new actor in the role (one not readily accepted by most people) and that moviegoers are more fickle now than they have ever been.

Does it look like it's going to be as good as Spy Who Loved Me where things stand now?

I dunno. There are some positive signs. Campbell is returning to Bond for the first time after 10 years. Lewis Gilbert had returned for the first time after 10 years. We have some old writers mixed in with some new ones.

But this is a make or break Bond. If it tanks, with the way movies are going these days, it could be the last. No joke. Ticket sales are down across the board. Sure-fire successes like King Kong, adored by everyone who sees it, aren't doing well.

[Judo chop]

I don't know anything about box-offices.

I feel good because Craig is perfect for a 'grittier' Bond, which is what they claim to have written.

And to support (and even enhance) that claim, they have hired Haggis. (Who is still writing? Or is he done?) This point seems to be overlooked by most folks here at CBN. If Haggis wasn't involved, though, I'd be thinking "OMG, P&W CANNOT HANDLE THIS TASK." As it stands, I feel pretty darn good. Campbell doesn't excite me, nor does he spell tragedy for me. If the casting of Vesper fits in with the overall vision as well as Craig does, I'm 99% convinced.

Again, I don't know anything about box-offices, and very little about what the public at large will like. I can only speak for what I will like.

[luciusgore]

If Cecile de France is hired as Vesper I'll breathe a sigh of relief. Then just get someone interesting for the theme song. Please, not a Garbage or Sheryl Crow.

[tdalton]

I'm not a box office expert by any means, but I think there may be a couple of reasons for King Kong's disappointing returns at the box office. First of all, they spent so much time marketing the film that it may have ended up being a bit too much for the general public. Once you keep forcing the same thing at the public for an extended period of time without stopping, generally they're not going to want it anymore. After seeing countless King Kong advertisements, tie-ins on late night TV with the talk shows, countless other tie-ins and reminders all over TV and such, I began to not want so see the movie. Another thing that kept me away, however, is how fake the whole thing looked. I'm not a huge fan of CGI, especially when it looks as fake as everything on the advertisements for the film looked. So, for me, those are two things that kept me away and kept several other people I know away, but I can't speak, obviously, for everyone else, though.

As far as Casino Royale is concerned, I think that the box office is going to continue to struggle to the point where what we now consider to be a failure or a disappointment will be the new norm for film grosses. CR may do a bit better than King Kong (I don't know exactly how much the film has taken in so far, so I can't really comment on exactly how much CR will bring in either), but even if it is a "disappointing" total, that total may end up being the new blockbuster number considering as how many people are starting to wait for the films to come out on DVD before they see them, now that films are reaching that format faster than they used to. I can say that I am definitely waiting for the arrival of same-day DVD releases, and that will mean the end of my theater going experience. I've already figured out that, for me, there will only be 4-5 movies, maybe, that I'll see in theaters by the end of 2006, but realistically, I'll probably only see 2 or 3 of them. Walk The Line, Munich, Mission: Impossible 3, and Casino Royale. Other than that, I'll more than likely be waiting for the DVD releases of the other films because it's just not worth it to go to the theater anymore.

For the general direction about where CR is headed, that could be another indicator about how the audience reacts to the film. I know that the hardcore Bond fan camp is divided on the whole reboot idea, but if they were to alienate even half of the actual Bond fanbase, that would be the beginning of what could ultimately be a failure at the box office. If many Bond fans don't like what they're seeing, then that may rub off on those that they know and those who trust their knowledge of what Bond is all about, and maybe some of those will stay away from the film. Probably an unlikely scenario, yes, but still possible. I just don't see how a Bond film, any Bond film for that matter (even one starring Pierce Brosnan) could fare very well in this time of extremely low box office returns. IMO, CR will be very lucky to break 30 million on its opening weekend.

[blueman]

If Cecile de France is hired as Vesper I'll breathe a sigh of relief. Then just get someone interesting for the theme song. Please, not a Garbage or Sheryl Crow.

That would be great, casting de France. Then get Terrance Stamp for Le Chiffre and they'd be set. Or, is there a bit younger version of Terrance out there...

Really think so far, CR is headed to mostly good places.

[JameswpBond]

Casino Royale is heading to the top of the box office!

[dinovelvet]

But this is a make or break Bond. If it tanks, with the way movies are going these days, it could be the last. No joke. Ticket sales are down across the board. Sure-fire successes like King Kong, adored by everyone who sees it, aren't doing well.

Its kind of amusing that everyone said War of the Worlds was going to bomb because of Tom Cruise's antics, then it became the highest grossing film of the year. Then everybody was saying Munich will sweep all the awards and King Kong will be the highest grossing movie ever made. Obviously those two things aren't happening.
Look at two more films this summer - Batman Begins and Fantastic Four. Both were big hits, but one got great reviews and one got panned. What does all this prove? That you can't predict anything. 'Good' films don't always do well, and 'Bad' films don't always do badly.

[Qwerty]

That you can't predict anything.

Well said dinovelvet. And even if the predictions are indeed true, from whose point of view are they coming from? Your own? Film reviewers?

I really think fans are over-analyzing everything they can about Casino Royale - and personally, I find that doing so takes every bit of fun and enjoyment out of the film. Granted, all forums seem to center around such discussion, but I don't think that every little rumour, news report, etc. needs to be taken so heavily.

Recently there was a member on here flipping out that there wasn't much new news on Casino Royale - begging for anything...something... to be posted. Honestly. Chill out and calm down.

It is a movie

Nothing more.

[Mr Malcolm]

I agree. With people getting hung up on Craig's height, his hair colour, Bond smoking or not, etc. it's beginning to sound like the Lord of the Rings forums did during the making of those films. One of the biggest arguments by far was not about the casting, the crew, the changes to the book, or even whether the films would be a success or not, but:

Whether or not the balrog is supposed to have wings.

As Qwerty says, it's only a movie. It could also be a very good one.

[Agent 76]

I'm confident that Casino Royale will be a great spy movie as also one great James Bond movie. For sure it will present the 21st century 007.

Right on Craig, right on!

[Blue07]

I suspect it will turn out to be a decent film. It will be dark and gritty and all those other words everyone keeps using, then in two or three films time we will be back to invisible cars and billions of CGI shots.

[MarcAngeDraco]

CR could be a great Bond film (by my standards), but I don't think that would necessarily mean it would be successful at the box office...

[Byron]

I suspect it will turn out to be a decent film. It will be dark and gritty and all those other words everyone keeps using, then in two or three films time we will be back to invisible cars and billions of CGI shots.

I agree. I have a feeling that CR will have the same dark 50's Ian Fleming adventure feel of the first half of the Living Daylights.

And with an excellent and human Bond.

[Qwerty]

I agree.  With people getting hung up on Craig's height, his hair colour, Bond smoking or not, etc. it's beginning to sound like the Lord of the Rings forums did during the making of those films.  One of the biggest arguments by far was not about the casting, the crew, the changes to the book, or even whether the films would be a success or not, but:

Whether or not the balrog is supposed to have wings.

As Qwerty says, it's only a movie.  It could also be a very good one.

[blueman]

That you can't predict anything.

Well said dinovelvet. And even if the predictions are indeed true, from whose point of view are they coming from? Your own? Film reviewers?

I really think fans are over-analyzing everything they can about Casino Royale - and personally, I find that doing so takes every bit of fun and enjoyment out of the film. Granted, all forums seem to center around such discussion, but I don't think that every little rumour, news report, etc. needs to be taken so heavily.

Recently there was a member on here flipping out that there wasn't much new news on Casino Royale - begging for anything...something... to be posted. Honestly. Chill out and calm down.

It is a movie

Nothing more.

Um, that was me. True I'm antsy as heck waiting to hear any casting news, but that was also a bit toungue-in-cheek, the over-analysis of every little detail does get overmuch.

I just wanna know who's Vesper! (Oh, and I guess Le Chiffre too... ) Doubt I'll have too much to say after the casting comes out, I don't want to know any more about the plot than I already do, I like to sit and watch a movie with as little info about it as possible...if that's not too oxymoronic.

[Harmsway]

I'm very happy thus far.

[Qwerty]

Um, that was me.

Nope, I'm referring to someone else.

[Streetworker]

With King Kong posting disappointing box office, the film front has changed dramatically, and for CR to succeed, it will have to knock one out of the park, be one of the best Bond films in maybe 30 years. It will definitely need to be the best since Spy Who Loved Me, given that there's a new actor in the role (one not readily accepted by most people) and that moviegoers are more fickle now than they have ever been.

Does it look like it's going to be as good as Spy Who Loved Me where things stand now?

I dunno. There are some positive signs. Campbell is returning to Bond for the first time after 10 years. Lewis Gilbert had returned for the first time after 10 years. We have some old writers mixed in with some new ones.

But this is a make or break Bond. If it tanks, with the way movies are going these days, it could be the last. No joke. Ticket sales are down across the board. Sure-fire successes like King Kong, adored by everyone who sees it, aren't doing well.

In a way, the downturn in the box office, typified by the relative disappointment of King Kong (let's keep it in perspective, because KK has hardly tanked), could be good news for Casino Royale. Box office returns are, and always have been, cyclical. 2005 has seen something of a downturn, but people I've spoken to in the industry are expecting it to pick up in 2006. So CR might open at the buoyant time.

No Bond film has ever lost money and I don't expect Casino Royale will, although I personally doubt it will match DAD's performance at the box office. Whatever his knockers on here will claim, one of the things Brosnan is rarely credited for is managing to attract punters to his Bond films who wouldn't normally go to a Bond movie. Halle Berry also brought in black audience members who may not have gone to see a Bond movie before. And DAD celebrated the series' 40th anniversary, which meant feature writers on newspapers and mags had a good hook to hang their pieces on rather than "oh-it's-just-another-Bond-movie".

Casino Royale will have none of these advantages, although interest in the new James Bond should see it through. I'm not sure it would necessarily spell the end of the series if Casino Royale is a box office disappointment; although I believe the franchise would be in serious jeopardy if the next one tanked as well. But, of course, any Bond film since Licence To Kill is a bonus, because there really were moments in the bleak early 90s when even I began to think we'd never see another Bond movie.

[Peter Franks]

I suspect it will turn out to be a decent film. It will be dark and gritty and all those other words everyone keeps using, then in two or three films time we will be back to invisible cars and billions of CGI shots.

I agree. I have a feeling that CR will have the same dark 50's Ian Fleming adventure feel of the first half of the Living Daylights.

And with an excellent and human Bond.

You better not wish for that or you'll be sorry when you see it. Better have an open mind about it then you'll be happy if it turns out to be a smoke free 100 million dollars action movie with computer game tie in and Jessica Simpson in it.

[Daltonfan]

The King Kong numbers are disappointing because it cost so much to produce and market. The last summer has proved that studios have little idea of what will attract paying customers so the safest bet would be reduce their risks by cutting costs. The Bourne movies didn't have huge box offices, but their production costs were moderate so they're seen as successful. I think many of us are hoping CR will be the smaller, grittier Bond instead of an overblown CGI explosion. Perhaps not DAD box office but more profitable.

[Peter Franks]

The King Kong numbers are disappointing because it cost so much to produce and market. The last summer has proved that studios have little idea of what will attract paying customers so the safest bet would be reduce their risks by cutting costs. The Bourne movies didn't have huge box offices, but their production costs were moderate so they're seen as successful. I think many of us are hoping CR will be the smaller, grittier Bond instead of an overblown CGI explosion. Perhaps not DAD box office but more profitable.

Mr Campbell said it will cost the same as Die Another Day. In terms of production costs it can be said that they will Diet Another Day.

OK bad joke.

[MarcAngeDraco]

I'm not sure why they need the same budget as DAD, if it's really going to be a film with less explosions, special effects, etc. as they have indicated...

Seems like they could make such a film on considerably less budget...

[Peter Franks]

I'm not sure why they need the same budget as DAD

So they can hide a lot of it under the carpet and write it off as expenses

[Tinfinger]

I wish I could operate with that kind of budget with my own low-key, gritty lifestyle...heh heh.

Seriously, though...

The feeling among many, but not all, is that EON made changes in Bond that were not asked for or needed. To many, Brosnan was the hottest thing since frozen Canadian Bacon Pizza, and they fully expected him to come back for a 5th Bond, if only to apologize for the last Bond movie. When that did not happen, many of them felt cheated, and here they are.

[Blue07]

I'm not sure why they need the same budget as DAD, if it's really going to be a film with less explosions, special effects, etc. as they have indicated...

Seems like they could make such a film on considerably less budget...

Could be that with the casting of Craig they feel the need to go for a big name for Vesper - and a big pay cheque. If, as has been stated, there is one explosion and they are cutting back on all the CGI excess of before - and they are filming outside of the UK - then you have to wonder just why it need cost as much as DAD. I suspect the toned down one explosion comment might be a misleading quote.

[Myrddin]

I wish I could operate with that kind of budget with my own low-key, gritty lifestyle...heh heh. 

Seriously, though...

The feeling among many, but not all, is that EON made changes in Bond that were not asked for or needed.  To many, Brosnan was the hottest thing since frozen Canadian Bacon Pizza, and they fully expected him to come back for a 5th Bond, if only to apologize for the last Bond movie.  When that did not happen, many of them felt cheated, and here they are.

Yes, many of Brosnan fans have this feeling, but peolple that go to the theatres has not this attitude towards this film.
Casin

[Bon-san]

If Cecile de France is hired as Vesper I'll breathe a sigh of relief.

Yeah, because hiring her is a guarantee against the film tanking (which was your big concern in the first post in this thread, no?).

She would make an interesting Vesper.

I'm not worried about CR's box office. When it is released it may net pots of cash, or it may yield more modest returns. Either way, I don't see it being the end of the series. If the box office downturn endures, however, at some point we might start seeing a lot more films released direct to dvd, and even the Mighty Bond could be one of them.

[tdalton]

I'm not worried about CR's box office.  When it is released it may net pots of cash, or it may yield more modest returns.  Either way, I don't see it being the end of the series.  If the box office downturn endures, however, at some point we might start seeing a lot more films released direct to dvd, and even the Mighty Bond could be one of them.

At this point, I'm starting to become more in favor of the direct to DVD releases now. It's just too much of a hassle to go to the theater anymore. At least from the comfort of my own home, I can make sure that I have the best experience possible watching the film with no distractions that have become a mainstay at the movie theaters nowadays.

[Agent007.5]

I too am afraid of what CR might do at the box office, I'm not expecting much just by all the problems they've had and they're only in pre- production! and the fact that M:I:III has such a cool trailer out now and that it's opening 6 months before CR. Here's my predictions for CR:

North American Opening Weekend: $15- 20 million
Total North American Gross: $70- 80 million
Total Worldwide Gross (including NA): $120 million

And if these predictions are true, I would expect Craig to be fired (either Brosnan brought back or Clive Owen brought in) and that Sony will take most of Eon's control away from them.

[tdalton]

I think that CR will get to about $25 million on opening weekend, certainly enough to warrant a second Craig Bond film. After that, though, I think that Sony will probably look to change the lead actor and try to push for Clive Owen or Hugh Jackman at that point.