95 replies to this topic

[K1Bond007]

The only figures which i'am not sure of are the ones for DAD apparently
based on an MGM figure of $456.
Also does that mean this list is also based on the MGM figure of $390 mil
for TWINE.

Yet neither of these figures are reported by the film industry analysts,
who have the boxoffice tracking for DAD & TWINE reportedly as having finished
totals of $432 mil & $361.8 mil for these movies.
In fact i queried the boxoffice of TWINE with 'boxofficemojo' in 2000
while the film was playing in its last market i.e. Japan, and at the time
the film was listed as of having a final gross of $352 mil. I can therefore
believe the figure of $361.8 as that would of totted up all the final small
takings around the world........but a jump of $40 mil to $390 mil cant be right.

For the list TWINE was 390 and DAD was 456. Those numbers have always been a little .. fishy.. but that's what MGM reports.

Not to discredit Boxofficemojo, but they weren't exactly the greatest with international numbers back in the day. But yeah, I don't really believe those numbers either.

[English Agent]

The only figures which i'am not sure of are the ones for DAD apparently
based on an MGM figure of $456.
Also does that mean this list is also based on the MGM figure of $390 mil
for TWINE.

Yet neither of these figures are reported by the film industry analysts,
who have the boxoffice tracking for DAD & TWINE reportedly as having finished
totals of $432 mil & $361.8 mil for these movies.
In fact i queried the boxoffice of TWINE with 'boxofficemojo' in 2000
while the film was playing in its last market i.e. Japan, and at the time
the film was listed as of having a final gross of $352 mil. I can therefore
believe the figure of $361.8 as that would of totted up all the final small
takings around the world........but a jump of $40 mil to $390 mil cant be right.

For the list TWINE was 390 and DAD was 456. Those numbers have always been a little .. fishy.. but that's what MGM reports.

Not to discredit Boxofficemojo, but they weren't exactly the greatest with international numbers back in the day. But yeah, I don't really believe those numbers either.

I believe the studios get their figures from the boxoffice tracking sources
so i don't know why there is a discrepancy in the figures.
It would be helpful if these sources were to put out to the public there figures,
and update them periodically, then there could be no argument.

In regards to 'boxofficemojo' i recently questioned them about how upto date and
accurate their figures were, in relation to other sources, i wasn't being rude, but i had found some inconsistencies in their figures............Their president
Brandon Gray, emailed me to say they were the most accurate of the boxoffice sources..
........who am i to argue, but then again they would say that, but their site is becoming
more comprehensive over the years.

[Qwerty]

With CR's $950k gross on Friday, CR should pass Die Another Day's US gross within the next week.

It'll probably net $1.5-2 million over the next couple days, and then it'll be within $1.5-1 million of DAD's total domestic gross.

Yet one more record to break.

[Dr. Noah]

This "adjusted" stuff is ridiculous. When the early Bonds came out, there was no cable, pay-per-view or DVD. They didn't even play on network TV until the mid-seventies in the US. They were re-released CONSTANTLY in packages with each new release, so basically every time today you watch a DVD, somebody in the sixties went to a drive in to watch a "FRWL/TB" package or the like. Now most people spend the money they would've paid for tickets at a theater to BUY the movie, instead -- and it actually costs less, if you count the cost of your date, food, etc. It's a different industry than even five years ago.

Nobody here is qualified to break down adjusted grosses using dollar values, economic factors, etc., with any accuracy at all.

They've made about $520 mil so far. It's top-ten in the US. They're very happy.

[Mr_Wint]

This "adjusted" stuff is ridiculous. When the early Bonds came out, there was no cable, pay-per-view or DVD. They didn't even play on network TV until the mid-seventies in the US. They were re-released CONSTANTLY in packages with each new release, so basically every time today you watch a DVD, somebody in the sixties went to a drive in to watch a "FRWL/TB" package or the like. Now most people spend the money they would've paid for tickets at a theater to BUY the movie, instead -- and it actually costs less, if you count the cost of your date, food, etc. It's a different industry than even five years ago.

Nobody here is qualified to break down adjusted grosses using dollar values, economic factors, etc., with any accuracy at all.

I dont think that anyone will say that the adjusted numbers can explain everything. It is still a very, very, raw estimate. But un-adjusted numbers are even more "ridiculous" if you compare a film from 1962 with a 2006 film.

[English Agent]

........er??

I don't believe anyone here does compare a films boxoffice
from 40 years ago to todays films, purely on their gross
at the time.

[DLibrasnow]

4. Thunderball (1965) $1.101 billion

That cannot be right

I have no problem beliebing that figure. The movie Thunderball was the most successful movie of 1965.

I do doubt that any of the Brosnan movies crossed the $500 million mark though, inflation hasn't increased by THAT much in the past 10 years.

[Dr. Noah]

........er??

I don't believe anyone here does compare a films boxoffice
from 40 years ago to todays films, purely on their gross
at the time.

Welcome to fandom.

[Jackanaples]

I wonder if it will get to the $575 million that some were predicting for it.

I'm pretty sure that's the number I predicted for it. As I recall many (GS and the like) scoffed at the number and said that I couldn't possibly be serious...

[K1Bond007]

4. Thunderball (1965) $1.101 billion

That cannot be right

I have no problem beliebing that figure. The movie Thunderball was the most successful movie of 1965.

I do doubt that any of the Brosnan movies crossed the $500 million mark though, inflation hasn't increased by THAT much in the past 10 years.

Arguably only GoldenEye has. It depends on the figures you use. For the list it says that DAD did 456 million worldwide, while most other sources say 431. If it's 431 then it didn't cross. The same can be said for TWINE. I believe TND is close, but hasn't yet.

[Jet Set Willy]

Could not believe it! Just been to the 5pm showing of CR tonight in Guildford and it was a full house (completely). I was lucky to get a seat.

The ticket guy said it was sold out last night also.

Wow!!!

[English Agent]

Could not believe it! Just been to the 5pm showing of CR tonight in Guildford and it was a full house (completely). I was lucky to get a seat.

The ticket guy said it was sold out last night also.

Wow!!!

Amazing as SUNDAY evening is normally a quiet time at cinemas.

Whereis the multiplex in Guildford.

I used to live near there 8 years ago and there was a cinema at the top of the
high street, is it still there?

[Jet Set Willy]

Could not believe it! Just been to the 5pm showing of CR tonight in Guildford and it was a full house (completely). I was lucky to get a seat.

The ticket guy said it was sold out last night also.

Wow!!!

Amazing as SUNDAY evening is normally a quiet time at cinemas.

Whereis the multiplex in Guildford.

I used to live near there 8 years ago and there was a cinema at the top of the
high street, is it still there?

If it's the Odeon, then yes.

[Qwerty]

Could not believe it! Just been to the 5pm showing of CR tonight in Guildford and it was a full house (completely). I was lucky to get a seat.

The ticket guy said it was sold out last night also.

Wow!!!

Wow indeed!

[dinovelvet]

Worldwide total is now $531 million! Its debut in Italy was a whopping $4.6 mil - DAD made 6.1 mil TOTAL in Italy! Obviously CR has much more Italian interest due to the Venice & Lake Como locations as well as Giancarlo Giannini and Caterina Murino, but still, huge numbers.

http://www.variety.c...8...yid=-1&cs=1

"Casino Royale" remains a solid player in 2007, finishing a distant but decent second with $19.2 million at 5,045 in 60 markets, led by its Italian debut of $4.6 million at 425 for the best opening for a James Bond pic in that market.

"Casino," which improved from the previous frame by 16% and declined by only 12% in holdover markets, has hit $371 million overseas -- 24th highest of all time and $100 million better than the previous best Bond pic, "Die Another Day" -- and $531 million worldwide.

"Casino" has shown particular power in the U.K., its eighth frame, dipping just 19% to $2.3 million at 360 to bring the Brit cume to $99.1 million. Only two other pics -- "Titanic" and "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" -- have topped $100 million in Blighty.

[Tiin007]

Worldwide total is now $531 million! Its debut in Italy was a whopping $4.6 mil - DAD made 6.1 mil TOTAL in Italy! Obviously CR has much more Italian interest due to the Venice & Lake Como locations as well as Giancarlo Giannini and Caterina Murino, but still, huge numbers.

http://www.variety.c...8...yid=-1&cs=1

"Casino Royale" remains a solid player in 2007, finishing a distant but decent second with $19.2 million at 5,045 in 60 markets, led by its Italian debut of $4.6 million at 425 for the best opening for a James Bond pic in that market.

"Casino," which improved from the previous frame by 16% and declined by only 12% in holdover markets, has hit $371 million overseas -- 24th highest of all time and $100 million better than the previous best Bond pic, "Die Another Day" -- and $531 million worldwide.

"Casino" has shown particular power in the U.K., its eighth frame, dipping just 19% to $2.3 million at 360 to bring the Brit cume to $99.1 million. Only two other pics -- "Titanic" and "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" -- have topped $100 million in Blighty.

[bill007]

Take that, you Craig haters you.

[K1Bond007]

Awesome news.

Pictures are awesome Worldwide chart

Also this beats my projection that I made a year ago, which a ton of people here called high. My ceiling was $520 million though I also later stated that admissions could go as high as Moonraker (85.1). It's only about 30 million from matching that. I wonder now if it'll hit that 575 million that analysts were saying earlier.

[JackWade]

Wow, $531 million... great success!

Also, that's great to hear about sold out theaters, but I would imagine that these are happening in the smaller theaters now that CR has been out for awhile, and not the huge theaters reserved for newer movies. Regardless, that's still great to hear that they're selling out.

[English Agent]

Excellent........i've just read a report at 'ScreenDaily'
confirming the boxoffice reports............and its amazing
that CR is actually grossing more now at the overseas market,
than it was over the holiday season.
BO Analysts now predict that CR could even reach nearly $400 mil
in overseas figures alone.

As predicted the film had an excellent start in Italy, despite
that market not being a particularly strong one for Bond films.

Towards the end of this week a new record for a Bond will be set
in the US

and, in the UK the $100 mil barrier will be broken, and only the
third film ever to do that.
Only 2 other film have achieved that:-

TITANIC = $114,000,000 &

LOTR: ROTK = $106,000,000

Normally action films have 2-3 good weeks at the boxoffice,
then fade away into oblivion.

It goes to prove, that making a film with a good story and
characters will always do better than a film with just large
explosions and a few lines of dialogue in between.

Edited by English Agent, 08 January 2007 - 04:21 PM.

[Qwerty]

-----UPDATE-----

Casino Royale Remains Solid; Worldwide Box Office Exceeds $530 Million

Strong staying power in UK; #1 opening in Italy

[dodge]

Thanks to all who've passed along the news. It seems like only yesterday that the tabloids were slamming and sliming Dan Craig. What's that precious sound I hear?

Plop! Crunch! Plop! Crunch!

Ah, it's the sound of Humble Pie being served and eaten.

Sweet.

[English Agent]

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

[Qwerty]

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

...or just let them be forgotten.

[dodge]

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

...or just let them be forgotten.

Yeah, I used to go there regularly. But every visit to the site registers as a 'hit' and simply feeds their egoes.

[Publius]

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

To summarize for those who don't feel like visiting that site:

Happy Feet and Night at the Museum "prove more popular" with audiences.

(Imagine that, family friendly pics with modest run times grossing more than a dark Bond epic. I guess no movie is allowed to beat Bond...like how Ace Ventura beat GoldenEye or Harry Potter trounced Die Another Day.)

"Daniel Craig’s James Bond led Casino Royale to impressive business — but no more so than Pierce Brosnan ever did." * Kevin Williamson Calgary Sun

"So far, the numbers show a decent $150 million take in the US. But that makes it no better or worse in this country's theatres than the previous Bond movies starring Pierce Brosnan. In many ways, "Casino Royale's" release domestically has reached the Bond audience, but not done much to broaden the franchise's popularity."

(i.e., Casino Royale is equally as popular and successful as any of the Brosnans...so the boycott must have worked and shown that audiences rejected Craig...right? )

"...Casino still trails both Die and Tomorrow Never Dies in attendance by a likely insurmountable margin." *boxofficemojo.com

(Go on Muppets, tell them how it compares to the other two...and then look at the worldwide figure...and then look at it in light of how relatively mature and intense the content was...and how general box office is down thanks to home video...and how glowing the reviews are...etc.)

Well, I found it all very funny.

[K1Bond007]

The statistic about only two films grossing more than 100 million in the UK is rather misleading. After looking into this it would appear the reason for this is due to exchange rates. So while maybe only two films have ever crossed that milestone, there are still more films ahead of Royale in the UK. This includes Harry Potter.

Even Variety reports in another article that POTC 2 made 102 million so that's 3 films.

Outdated by a week, but here's an all-time listing:
http://www.sky-is-fa...es-alltime.html

Don't know how reliable it is.

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

...or just let them be forgotten.

I wish some of you would take this advice. People stopped taking them seriously long ago, so should the rest of you. They look like fools. It doesn't get any better than that. All you guys do is feed them.

[English Agent]

The statistic about only two films grossing more than 100 million in the UK is rather misleading. After looking into this it would appear the reason for this is due to exchange rates. So while maybe only two films have ever crossed that milestone, there are still more films ahead of Royale in the UK. This includes Harry Potter.

Even Variety reports in another article that POTC 2 made 102 million so that's 3 films.

Outdated by a week, but here's an all-time listing:
http://www.sky-is-fa...es-alltime.html

Don't know how reliable it is.

UPDATE:-

Sorry, but the 'Muppets' have updated their website (i.e. DCnB).
They just can't come to terms with reality.
See their version of the boxoffice over there.

...or just let them be forgotten.

I wish some of you would take this advice. People stopped taking them seriously long ago, so should the rest of you. They look like fools. It doesn't get any better than that. All you guys do is feed them.

In reality CR's boxoffice performance in the UK should be quoted in pounds,
and on this basis that chart seems correct..........as you have summized
converting the UK boxoffice to dollars is misleading as the exchange rate
varies quite a bit, a few years ago the dollar was a lot stronger against
the pound, hence a film would of had to of done stunning business in the UK
to of reached the equivalent of $100 mil.

In regards to the 'Muppets' i'll try not to mention them again....'Muppets'....
....but think what we would of had to of put up with on these forums if CR had flopped.

Anyway just having a bit of fun with them (i don't take them seriously)

Bye

Edited by English Agent, 08 January 2007 - 07:17 PM.

[Double-0-Seven]

Over $530 million? That's outstanding!

I remember back when people didn't think it was even going to beat Die Another Day. Now look at it.

Edit: Forgot to mention, since it made $4.6 million in Italy this weekend, it was only a couple million away from beating Die Another Day's total gross there.

[Qwerty]

Seems like the estimate of $575 million is pretty likely to happen.