1228 replies to this topic

[Roger O. Thornhill]

http://en.wikipedia....g_films_by_year

[jaguar007]

http://en.wikipedia....g_films_by_year

sorry, I couldn't resist

[blueman]

Here's the lastest admissions ranking (worldwide, via some dude over at MI:6)


I take it all back. Now I'm convinced... (he writes sarcastically)...

dee-bee-five, if you didn't notice (or read with accuracy), that phrase-alongside the numbers- that I wrote were a quote from an early post of blueman.

Anyhow, do you really believe that there's a huge change in this numbers over these weeks, with only the successful opening of Japan?? I mean, Japan it's important but itsn't USA, or like UK- for EON-, at least.

I'm sorry but if I actually understood what the question was in that final paragraph, I'd try to answer you. (I'm not being sarcastic, by the way, I just don't grasp what you're getting at.)

Well it's very simple I'm just proposing to you the same that I proposed to HildebrandRarity let's just do the comparisson, (as blueman suggested), just from GE onwards with the admission numbers in a couple of months when QOS will be out of theaters.

I already doubt that QOS will be in the first spot of the last six Bond movies. But that again (I'm getting a little tired of state this) isn't failure or a disappointment to me, and that definitely doesn't make like less QOS.

I mean, GE could have better admission than QOS, but I really preffer this Forster's work many times more, over that Brosnan's debut.

Admissions puts QOS squarely in line with other modern-era follow-ups, even without Japan's figured in yet. How is that a "mild success"? Doesn't seem the right descriptor to me - was "Iron Man" a mild worldwide success? Cuz QOS looks to gave about the same BO.

Realistic comparisons would seem to suggest QOS is a BO hit, a blockbuster even. IMHO (also the NY Times' opinion ).

Something else about the WOM thing: don't they have the internet in Japan? How is it that QOS shattered yet another opening day/weekend record? Don't they know it's only a mild success, and not to bother with it that much?

[Bond Bug]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Edited by Bond Bug, 28 January 2009 - 03:46 AM.

[blueman]

*sigh*

[Kristian]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Either someone is delusional about his authority, or is being ironic. Either way...

YAWN.

[The ides of Mark]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Either someone is delusional about his authority, or is being ironic. Either way...

YAWN.

He's just so much smarter than us. Let us all bow our heads...

Edited by The ides of Mark, 28 January 2009 - 09:55 PM.

[Col. Sun]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Anyone bored rigid by these statements that somehow a film that has a WW gross of $560 million and rising is a flop and has screwed up the Bond franchise?

[HildebrandRarity]

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia.

You failed to mention it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in the UK by about 3 million Pounds.

In fact it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in Germany as well.

After the US, the UK and Germany are Bond's 2nd and 3rd largest market.

[Bond Bug]

Anyone bored rigid by these statements that somehow a film that has a WW gross of $560 million and rising is a flop and has screwed up the Bond franchise?

I never said it was a flop.

What I said was that despite huge, often record breaking, openings it did not have strong legs. That the movie didn't live up to its opening, must be a disappointment.

It would be like like running a 100m race and being in the lead from the start, but ending up in 10th place. That is what happens if you have weak legs!

[Kristian]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Either someone is delusional about his authority, or is being ironic. Either way...

YAWN.

He's just so much smarter then us. Let us all bow our heads...

It's "than" not "then." He's clearly smarter "than" at least one person on this board.

[Col. Sun]

Anyone bored rigid by these statements that somehow a film that has a WW gross of $560 million and rising is a flop and has screwed up the Bond franchise?

I never said it was a flop.

What I said was that despite huge, often record breaking, openings it did not have strong legs. That the movie didn't live up to its opening, must be a disappointment.

It would be like like running a 100m race and being in the lead from the start, but ending up in 10th place. That is what happens if you have weak legs!

$560 million at the B.O and still counting IS not weak legs.

Number 2 in UK, beating Dark Knight, No. 1 in Germany, in top 5 of most the places it has played in, in US top 10 for 09. Big opening in Japan 3 months after UK premiere. You call that weak legs!

[Bond Bug]

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia.

You failed to mention it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in the UK by about 3 million Pounds.

In fact it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in Germany as well.

After the US, the UK and Germany are Bond's 2nd and 3rd largest market.

Is that all? Just 3 million ahead of The Dark Knight in the UK. As I said, Quantum would have been expected to do a lot better considering it had the biggest opening in UK box office history.

But let's not get hung up about it. The main thing is that the producers take a different approach in the next film. They need to show that the movie will be significantly different to get the audience to come out in the same numbers.

Anyone bored rigid by these statements that somehow a film that has a WW gross of $560 million and rising is a flop and has screwed up the Bond franchise?

I never said it was a flop.

What I said was that despite huge, often record breaking, openings it did not have strong legs. That the movie didn't live up to its opening, must be a disappointment.

It would be like like running a 100m race and being in the lead from the start, but ending up in 10th place. That is what happens if you have weak legs!

$560 million at the B.O and still counting IS not weak legs.

Number 2 in UK, beating Dark Knight, No. 1 in Germany, in top 5 of most the places it has played in, in US top 10 for 09. Big opening in Japan 3 months after UK premiere. You call that weak legs!

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

I think this is hard to dispute.

[Col. Sun]

Is that all? Just 3 million ahead of The Dark Knight in the UK. As I said, Quantum would have been expected to do a lot better considering it had the biggest opening in UK box office history.

QOS ended up only a little behind CR in UK BO and it still beat the biggest WW BO hit of 09, The Dark Knight. I doubt the producers are unhappy about the UK BO at all.

I agree with you that Bond 23 will probably be lighter and more "classically" Bond; but I think that's the natural path now that they've really established Craig and there's little doubt the audience are there for Craig.

[dee-bee-five]

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia.

You failed to mention it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in the UK by about 3 million Pounds.

In fact it finished AHEAD of The Dark Knight in Germany as well.

After the US, the UK and Germany are Bond's 2nd and 3rd largest market.

Is that all? Just 3 million ahead of The Dark Knight in the UK. As I said, Quantum would have been expected to do a lot better considering it had the biggest opening in UK box office history.

But let's not get hung up about it. The main thing is that the producers take a different approach in the next film. They need to show that the movie will be significantly different to get the audience to come out in the same numbers.

Anyone bored rigid by these statements that somehow a film that has a WW gross of $560 million and rising is a flop and has screwed up the Bond franchise?

I never said it was a flop.

What I said was that despite huge, often record breaking, openings it did not have strong legs. That the movie didn't live up to its opening, must be a disappointment.

It would be like like running a 100m race and being in the lead from the start, but ending up in 10th place. That is what happens if you have weak legs!

$560 million at the B.O and still counting IS not weak legs.

Number 2 in UK, beating Dark Knight, No. 1 in Germany, in top 5 of most the places it has played in, in US top 10 for 09. Big opening in Japan 3 months after UK premiere. You call that weak legs!

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

Arrant nonsense.

I agree with you that Bond 23 will probably be lighter and more "classically" Bond; but I think that's the natural path now that they've really established Craig and there's little doubt the audience are there for Craig.

I think there's little doubt that Bond 23 will be as different from QoS as QoS was from CR. But it will be because the producers know that this is what keeps the series fresh (and Craig interested) not because a handful of fans on internet forums have thrown their teddies out of the pram because they couldn't handle or appreciate the subtext and intelligence of QoS. QoS is an artistic triumph and one, surely, the Broccolis know they can be very proud of.

[Bond Bug]

Is that all? Just 3 million ahead of The Dark Knight in the UK. As I said, Quantum would have been expected to do a lot better considering it had the biggest opening in UK box office history.

QOS ended up only a little behind CR in UK BO and it still beat the biggest WW BO hit of 09, The Dark Knight. I doubt the producers are unhappy about the UK BO at all.

I agree with you that Bond 23 will probably be lighter and more "classically" Bond; but I think that's the natural path now that they've really established Craig and there's little doubt the audience are there for Craig.

I won't argue that the box office wasn't good, but there were things about the movie clearly audiences didn't like and much of this was repairable in the editing suite. It was foolish to make a movie that many people found hard to watch or to follow because of the editing style. I think that alone cost them a lot of money. Much of the goodwill and new audience generated by Casino Royale has been squandered.

[YOLT]

QOS is a dissapointment in US but a sucess worldwide. If the exchange rates stayed the same as 2006 we could have been near 700m$ worldwide.

[Bond Bug]

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

Arrant nonsense.

Which part of my statement is incorrect?

Edited by Bond Bug, 28 January 2009 - 04:01 PM.

[dee-bee-five]

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

Arrant nonsense.

Which part of my statement is incorrect?

How long have you got?

[Bond Bug]

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

Arrant nonsense.

Which part of my statement is incorrect?

How long have you got?

If you say it is "nonsense" it is only fair you explain which part.

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Either someone is delusional about his authority, or is being ironic. Either way...

YAWN.

He's just so much smarter then us. Let us all bow our heads...

It's "than" not "then." He's clearly smarter "than" at least one person on this board.

Kristian - I love your irony!

[dee-bee-five]

'Legs' is a term used to express the ratio of the opening weekend box office compared to the total box office.

This ratio was low for Quantum.

What this suggests is the audience came out for the opening because they liked Casino Royale, but they didn't overwhelmingly recommend the movie to their friends and colleagues.

Arrant nonsense.

Which part of my statement is incorrect?

How long have you got?

If you say it is "nonsense" it is only fair you explain which part.

Actually, I don't believe there is a requirement to explain oneself on an internet forum. But if you insist...

I called your statement nonsense - "arrant nonsense" to be precise - because you were grafting your well documented dislike of QoS (to which you are entitled) onto the box office figures to prove that the film was a disappointment or didn't have legs when, by any reckoning, it is a blockbuster hit (and recognised as such by the New York Times). This simply will not do.

Against the backdrop of the worst economic crisis in a generation - in the UK, the worst in 30 years at least - and a crisis that had not even started to bite properly when Indiana Jones 4, Iron Man, Mamma Mia! and TDK opened, QoS has performed spectacularly well. By all means, keep banging on about how much you hate the film (it's your right, just as it's my right to disagree with you). But don't misrepresent the figures to try and prove other people agree with you. It's disingenuous at best, dishonest at worst.

[HildebrandRarity]

As per:

http://hollywoodinsi...box-office.html

Admissions DROPPED 5 PERCENT in 2008 because of the recession.

The story gives only a perrcentage drop for the entire year of 2008...but one can safely suggest that the percentage drop was bigger later in the year (after the stock market crash of September and the huge job losses of October, November and December) than it was earlier in the year.

Why else would Madagascar 2 not go above $200 Mil?

[HildebrandRarity]

Against the backdrop of the worst economic crisis in a generation - in the UK, the worst in 30 years at least - and a crisis that had not even started to bite properly when Indiana Jones 4, Iron Man, Mamma Mia! and TDK opened, QoS has performed spectacularly well.

I doubt he/she understands what an economic crisis is. You see, his daddy didn't lose his job...so it's not something that's top of mind.

[Bond Bug]

Against the backdrop of the worst economic crisis in a generation - in the UK, the worst in 30 years at least - and a crisis that had not even started to bite properly when Indiana Jones 4, Iron Man, Mamma Mia! and TDK opened, QoS has performed spectacularly well.

I doubt he/she understands what an economic crisis is. You see, his daddy didn't lose his job...so it's not something that's top of mind.

I have certainly been at the receiving end of this recession having lost 1000 dollars EVERY day for six months.


The fact remains Quantum failed to match its opening. It did not have Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or any huge franchises opening at the same time.

And global box office is NOT in recession.

Hollywood resists recession
http://www.variety.c...1117997933.html

Similar story around the world including UK.

The pound may be weak, but that doesn't explain how Casino took well over 20% more than Quantum did in the UK after their opening weekends.

Pretending Quantum had strong legs is rather silly. In USA Quantum has taken around 2.5 times its opening. No movie that opened so high has failed to take 175m. Casino Royale took over 4 times its opening.

The movie had weak legs, no matter how you try to calculate it.

As per:

http://hollywoodinsi...box-office.html

Admissions DROPPED 5 PERCENT in 2008 because of the recession.

The story gives only a perrcentage drop for the entire year of 2008...but one can safely suggest that the percentage drop was bigger later in the year (after the stock market crash of September and the huge job losses of October, November and December) than it was earlier in the year.

Why else would Madagascar 2 not go above $200 Mil?

Admissions were down, but because of ticket price inflation American box office resisted recession.

[HildebrandRarity]

I doubt he/she understands what an economic crisis is. You see, his daddy didn't lose his job...so it's not something that's top of mind.

I have certainly been at the receiving end of this recession having lost 1000 dollars EVERY day for six months.

Oohhh...so you're saying that the show for you really began after the summer, then?

And, in your opinion, do you really feel post-Summer box office/admissions remained unaffected by a recession which mauled you to the tune of a grand a day?

[HildebrandRarity]

edited.

[SPOTTER]

[/quote by Mr Arlington Beach]
... I don't care about profitability, let's that EON (or Danjaq for that case) and the studios involved analyze that. As a fan I really care about the popularity of the Bond series, that's is expressed in the pure BO results-particularly, I would dare to say, in the admission ones-.

If the producers received $ 100 million I can care less, I mean good for them, but that doesn't make a movie more popular.

And regarding admission even fans of QOS (not you, of course), have showed where QOS really stands... do you need some reminder?? Here it is (courtesy of blueman's post):

"Here's the lastest admissions ranking (worldwide, via some dude over at MI:6, so FWIW), in millions.

1. Thunderball - 166.0
2. Goldfinger - 130.1
3. From Russia with Love - 95.3
4. Live and Let Die - 91.6
5. You Only Live Twice - 91.5
6. Casino Royale - 91.5
7. Moonraker - 85.1
8. The Spy Who Loved Me - 84.0
9. GoldenEye - 81.2
10. Die Another Day - 78.6
11. Quantum of Solace - 77.5
12. The World Is Not Enough - 77.1
13. Tomorrow Never Dies - 75.5
14. For Your Eyes Only - 72.9
15. Dr. No - 72.1
16. Diamonds Are Forever - 70.3
17. On Her Majesty's Secret Service - 62.4
18. Octopussy - 59.5
19. The Man with the Golden Gun - 51.6
20. The Living Daylights - 48.9
21. A View to a Kill - 44.5
22. Licence to Kill - 39.1

(this is a different listing than I'd seen, so QOS is still behind DAD...)

Contrast with the BO numbers:

1) Thunderball: $989,798,019
2) Goldfinger: $950,851,612
3) You Only Live Twice: $658,440,000
4) From Russia With Love: $657,190,588
5) Live And Let Die: $647,200,000
6) Casino Royale: $642,322,532
7) Dr. No: $602,478,011
8) Moonraker: $593,196,812
9) The Spy Who Loved Me: $588,624,215
10) GoldenEye: $580,608,243
11) Quantum of Solace: $549,601,400
12) Die Another Day: $526,359,783
13) Tomorrow Never Dies: $523,679,798
14) The World Is Not Enough: $504,144,305
15) Diamonds Are Forever: $497,745,454
16) For Your Eyes Only: $497,382,733
17) Octopussy: $421,428,571
18) On Her Majesty's Secret Service: $408,845,070
19) The Man With The Golden Gun: $369,522,994
20) The Living Daylights: $346,213,810
21) A View To A Kill: $304,396,044
22) Licence To Kill: $278,504,399
"

Why don't we talk about this HildebrandRarity??!! As you can see QOS is not at the top nor at the bottom, more in the middle zone. Or is it a biased observation of mine, and you have some 'numbers' to explain this 'oddity'.
[/quote]









Mr. Arlington Beach, You cannot compare films at the box office. You can do it for fun using the ticket inflation rule but it is NOT very accurate. I repeat the list of addmissions above is NOT very accurate!!!


QOS is NOT in 11th place in the Bond series. God knows where it is. The average price for a cinema ticket on BOX OFFICE MOJO etc is in dollars. These are not accurate figures, only rough guides and to be honest there not even that. In the U.K. QOS is currently £4 miilion behind CR's final gross. CR's total of £55 million in 2006 was worth $106 million U.S. QOS's £51 million is currently worth only $80 million. Surely people realise that £4 million is not $26 million so what's happening boys and girls? The pound is NOT worth as much in 2008 as it was worth in 2006!

Someone else has also mentioned about The Dark Knight taking £49 million in the U.K. to QOS's £51 million but the former is ahead in dollars. You cannot even compare films that are released in the same year because what I have just written is proof of what a difference a few months can make.


I would like to know how many people have seen QOS compared to CR. That would be interesting. I think the figures would be a lot closer than you think.(I will repeat this one more time. YOU CANNOT FIND THIS FIGURE BY USING THE TICKET INFLATION METHOD, DUH!)

You can only look at each film individually. If a film has made more than it has cost then it has done well. It is successful. You can't say that the people at SONY expected $700 million + for QOS and were really gutted when it didn't happen. That is twaddle! James Bond is a massive franchise. QOS is going to make the suits an absolute fortune with dvds, tv deals ect, etc and that's all there is to it.

Edited by SPOTTER, 28 January 2009 - 08:59 PM.

[Mr. Arlington Beech]

QOS is a dissapointment in US but a sucess worldwide.

Watch out, YOLT!!

I know that you like this film, but some QOS's hardcore fans (not all of them) might want to bash you, just for dare to point out a little thing not so good, about their favourite movie.

Edited by Mr. Arlington Beech, 28 January 2009 - 09:19 PM.

[The ides of Mark]

AN EXCLUSIVE BOND BUG REPORT

Although Quantum of Solace opened big, breaking records in many countries, the final figures will be very disappointing to the producers who may be seeking their own Quantum of Solace.

In Britain, for example, it smashed all opening records, but ends up four million pounds behind Casino and eighteen million behind Mamma Mia. In North America it was the highest grossing movie opening ever that failed to make more than 175m dollars total.

The movie clearly suffered from bad legs. People came out to see it after being impressed with Casino, but word-of-mouth was not strong.

This points to a new direction in the next installment to rescue the franchise from decline: a return to classic Bond values, a comprehensible story, a real villian, none of the Edward Scissorhands editing, perhaps the return of regulars like Q or R, M and Moneypenny and a lighter, more likable Mr Bond.

Either someone is delusional about his authority, or is being ironic. Either way...

YAWN.

He's just so much smarter then us. Let us all bow our heads...

It's "than" not "then." He's clearly smarter "than" at least one person on this board.

My bad English is obviously not my native language (only a smart guy would read the nationality on the side), so more typo's are bound to happen...

Edited by The ides of Mark, 28 January 2009 - 09:59 PM.

[Bond Bug]

I doubt he/she understands what an economic crisis is. You see, his daddy didn't lose his job...so it's not something that's top of mind.

I have certainly been at the receiving end of this recession having lost 1000 dollars EVERY day for six months.

Oohhh...so you're saying that the show for you really began after the summer, then?

And, in your opinion, do you really feel post-Summer box office/admissions remained unaffected by a recession which mauled you to the tune of a grand a day?

I'm not sure what "show" you are talking about in your first question.

I would need to look at the figures to answer your second question but I do know that January in north America is already ahead of January last year.

My loss has come mainly from the pound devaluing as I am selling up and moving from UK to America - I also bought property last year that I have to sell at a big loss.