This admissions chart is the better gauge IMO. And no, QOS won't catch CR, not even close. But it might do something no sophomore Bond film since FRWL has done: break into the top 10 for admissions (its currently #11 now, behind DN). We clearly are in a big Bond era not seen since Moore's glory days of the 70s (and Brosnan's films rank about where one would expect, solidly in the middle - and the 80s Bonds suck ). That a risky Bond film like QOS is doing so well only ups the expectations for a more crowd-friendly 23... maybe it'll even break the top 5? That would be historic IMO.
All in all and even with the recession, good on QOS. {[]
For me, it's hard to gauge success completely by comparing it with other films in the series, especially across 'eras' because there are too many other factors involved. Thunderball was the James Bond film that rode the apogee of Bond mania and it's number one because it was fueled by popularity. It's a strong film, but not considered the best by many. It would appear that Connery's Bond was quite the rage, but since then, other actors didn't fare as well. Even the Bond craze wasn't enough to push Lazenby over the top. So what contributes to a Bond film's success? Is it the character? Is it the actor? Is it the mood of audiences at the time? Most likely it's an almalgam of several factors. It's nice to see that the Bond franchise hasn't lost steam, but I'm at a loss as to what to expect from #23. As the rankings show, QoS dips from CR, as is the trend with sophomore films. Did QoS dip because of the actor? The style? audience mood? I dunno.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
...what contributes to a Bond film's success? Is it the character? Is it the actor? Is it the mood of audiences at the time? Most likely it's an almalgam of several factors. It's nice to see that the Bond franchise hasn't lost steam, but I'm at a loss as to what to expect from #23. As the rankings show, QoS dips from CR, as is the trend with sophomore films. Did QoS dip because of the actor? The style? audience mood? I dunno.
There's no one answer to this question, I think. Personally, I tend to believe it's the narrative pacing and 'rushed' feel of the piece. An extra fifteen minutes of character and exposition, plus a less frantic editing philosophy, probably would have added $50 million to the final take.* These are directorial issues, IMRO.
Outside of strident Bond fandom, I've not read anything negative about Craig's performance in the role---merely the usual observations that he doesn't 'look like' the other actors who've had the part---in fact, quite the opposite, so I won't buy into it being his fault. As ever, opinions will vary...
I'd also discount the recession theory. Audiences did come out to see this film; if one must suffer a 'sophomore jinx,' best to do it to the tune of half a billion dollars B-)
* An estimate snatched out of thin air, based upon nothing but the patented 'Loeffelholz Gut Instinct.'
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Recession. Sucks. And it's not just QOS, lots of recent releases have opened strong, but legs across the board are being cut off: biggest earner post-recession is Twilight at $175m. Also, I think the conversion to dollars masks that in many foreign markets, QOS is beating CR's numbers (I may be wrong about that, but I just saw that currently QOS has topped CR in Britain in pounds, but converted to US dollars it's still behind... wacky financial times ).
Here's my explanation for QoS's shockingly--shockingly!--low take at the box office this year: zero kid appeal. When you look at the other nine films in the American top 10, this is how they break down: four animated flicks (WALL-E, Kung Fu Panda, Madagascar 2, Horton Hears a Who), three superhero movies (Dark Knight, Iron Man, Hancock), one sci-fi-fantasy-adventure (Indy IV), and one teenage-vampires-in-love feature (Twilight). That QoS managed to find a niche in this bunch is amazing. Arguably it's the most adult of the top 10 films--and certainly the only one where the hero doesn't fly, get involved with the supernatural, or depend on computer-generated effects. (Wait a minute--did I just write that about a BOND movie?)
I agree, you really can't compare the box office success of films of different eras. In 1965, Thunderball was considered the cutting edge in action films and riding the crest of Bondmania, which at the time seemed second only as an entertainment and cultural phenom to Beatlemania. The kid thing is also a valid point. In 1965 I sat in a crowded theater on a Saturday afternoon that was loaded with children and teenagers cheering and applauding every cool move James Bond made in Thunderball. We then went home and played with our official Bond toys.
I'd certainly not prefer that EON make the new Bond films more "kid friendly"...it's enough that they maintain enough restaint to get a PG-13 rating in the US. I wonder if EON threw caution to the wind and made an R rated Bond film how much it would effect the box office? I have mixed emotions about that myself. I think the PG-13 constraints force EON and the writers, director, etc to be a bit more creative with how the violence and sex is presented rather than resorting to being overly graphic and artless. Although I must admit, QOS was given quite a long leash by the US ratings board as was CR. If CR and QOS were low budget, low profile films they may have been given "R's".
Why all the angsts about how QoS has done, when in fact it has done well. This is the 22nd movie in the franchise and it will be one of the top ten earning films of the year. I would say that is pretty good. I say this as a person who didn't care for the style of the film at all. It didn't do as well as CR, but it was close, what's wrong with that.
No doubt QOS has been a big success. It will do very well in Japan also. The most important thing is there will be a Bond 23...and most likely a 24 and 25 with Daniel Craig. It's always interesting to discuss and/or predict where EON will go with the next one. However these days, with the younger generation of EON at the helm it's a little more unpredictable and not always based upon the box office numbers of the previous film.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
...these days, with the younger generation of EON at the helm it's a little more unpredictable and not always based upon the box office numbers of the previous film.
Way to go, Eon! {[] Now it's January, I'm curious about what they'll do next...I wonder if P & W will get the gig...again
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Why all the angsts about how QoS has done, when in fact it has done well.
I for one am angst-free. . .I hope you noticed my "shockingly, shockingly" was a tongue-in-cheek tribute to Claude Rains. That said, according to BOM (which for two days didn't list QoS at all), QoS finished the year at $165.3 million, and it's continuing to rake in the funds: apparently, on New Year's Day, its take was at $165.7 m. It isn't impossible that the movie may indeed meet or surpass CR.
Also, final 2008 numbers are in, QOS finished #9 for the year in the states, and #7 worldwide. High end for modern-era Bonds, very nice. {[] Also, at $165.7m after 49 days in the US, that's nearly $9m ahead of CR at the same point in its US run (not that anybody cares or anything...).
Yep! Thus proving to all the nay-sers that the directors and all the rest knew what they were doing in making this film so gritty, realistic and strong. Way to go indeed!B-)
BOM now has QOS at $166,800,000 after the weekend estimates. That leaves it less than 1 million behind CR's total. Even though it's US run is all but over, I'm pretty sure it will eek out enough to get there and thus avoid being the first Bond film since LTK not to out gross the previous film. Although inflation of ticket prices over the past two years means it fell short of CR in admissions, EON will still get to crow about QOS becoming the highest grossing (US) Bond film ever and that will put a smile on their face I'm sure.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Yep! Thus proving to all the nay-sers that the directors and all the rest knew what they were doing in making this film so gritty, realistic and strong. Way to go indeed!B-)
Well said, TjustT {[]
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
As a Bond fan, one can only see QoS' strong BO performance as very good news. However, I still believe that Forster's directing and the screenplay were much weaker than what Campbell and the writers were able to achieve in CR. Also, I would say that QoS' success was, in a significant way, due to the success of CR. I believe that many Bond fans were eager to go see QoS because of CR, but they were probably left a little disappointed.
I still think that the right way to go with Craig's next film would be away from the "trendy" camerawork, and the "tortured soul" image of Bond, and to move it into the realm of something akin to GF or TSWLM (relatively speaking, of course; I'm not trying to say that the producers should go back to the submersible-car level of gadgetry, which I'm sure they won't anyway). However, a bit more humor, and a lighter tone would go a long way in ensuring the long-term success of the series. I think that something that combines the best elements from FRWL and GF would be just the thing for Bond23.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited January 2009
It's hard to believe that there's still a place on the planet where QoS pre-release hype is still building(!)...
They say that ticket sales are "expected to be strong" despite a "Japanese dubbed version of the film leaking on the internet two months ago."
CR did $19 million in Japan. This could be a nice 'cherry on top' for Quantum if it can approximate that...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The NY Times today had an in-depth article on US BO being down less than 1% in dollars, but 5% in admissions this past year. Also, in a paragraph citing Sony's earnings, it called both Hancock and QOS blockbusters - no "lesser blockbuster" for QOS, just blockbuster. I guess if it underperformed at all, it wasn't enough to merit a mention in the NY Times.
Slowly, slowly, QoS is crawling to the top of the Bond heap in North America--$166.5 million as of Monday. Worldwide the film is now at nearly $545 m. Oh, to own stock in EON!
Vox clamantis in deserto
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Slowly, slowly, QoS is crawling to the top of the Bond heap in North America--$166.5 million as of Monday. Worldwide the film is now at nearly $545 m. Oh, to own stock in EON!
I just found out it's still playing in my hometown...so it made the January benchmark I wondered aloud about a page or two ago!
Might have to go do my Bondian duty (at least) once more...I think I saw CR four times in the cinema; only three so far for QoS :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Somebody just pointed out on another forum, QOS will likely pass CR's US total this week - after only 8 weeks of release. Took CR 17 weeks to reach $167m... um, the word "Wow" comes to mind. :007)
Somebody just pointed out on another forum, QOS will likely pass CR's US total this week - after only 8 weeks of release. Took CR 17 weeks to reach $167m... um, the word "Wow" comes to mind. :007)
Uh, yes but QOS's drop off was much steeper than CR. It's not going to make much more than it has now as it's box office run is about finished. I think it will top CR but just barely.
Add in inflation of ticket prices over the last two years. QOS would probably have had to have earned about 175 million to equal the number of US admissions for CR. It's not going to do that. It did very well and will just pass CR's total dollar figure, but not quite as many people saw QOS in the US.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I think it will top CR but just barely...Add in inflation of ticket prices over the last two years. QOS would probably have had to have earned about 175 million to equal the number of US admissions for CR. It's not going to do that. It did very well and will just pass CR's total dollar figure, but not quite as many people saw QOS in the US.
Still, for a sophomore Bond film with mixed reviews---and outright condemnation in some pockets of fandom!---it's pretty respectable.
An employee of mine told me just today that her boyfriend is taking her on a date tonight...to see QoS :007) She told me she'd seen 'most' of CR at a friend's house, but had to leave before it was over...so, being the generous boss I am, I gave her a primer on the third act of Casino, so she won't be scratching her head too much tonight when Mr. White turns up in Bond's boot
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Somebody just pointed out on another forum, QOS will likely pass CR's US total this week - after only 8 weeks of release. Took CR 17 weeks to reach $167m... um, the word "Wow" comes to mind. :007)
Uh, yes but QOS's drop off was much steeper than CR. It's not going to make much more than it has now as it's box office run is about finished. I think it will top CR but just barely.
Add in inflation of ticket prices over the last two years. QOS would probably have had to have earned about 175 million to equal the number of US admissions for CR. It's not going to do that. It did very well and will just pass CR's total dollar figure, but not quite as many people saw QOS in the US.
QoS will definitely make as much as CR. The interesting thing to look at is the number of theaters. QoS is making the same amount in 800+ theaters that CR was making in 600+ theaters. There's no disputing that QoS has done well, though, tally-wise.
Trying to weigh BO totals with inflation, initial production budget, and the film's 'staying power' is a challenge and to me comes off as something of a wash. That's why I'm so curious as to see how EON decides to proceed from this point...they have a huge buffet to sift through to determine what worked and what didn't work for QoS.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Trying to weigh BO totals with inflation, initial production budget, and the film's 'staying power' is a challenge and to me comes off as something of a wash. That's why I'm so curious as to see how EON decides to proceed from this point...they have a huge buffet to sift through to determine what worked and what didn't work for QoS.
That's certainly true...I can't help but wonder what Barbara and Michael were expecting for this one, box-office wise---granted, you've got a greatly reduced (too much so?) running time, which gives the film more showings per screen...but you've also got something of a rule-breaking, frantic narrative pace, and an editing style that might not have served the film as well as hoped. In the midst of this success, there are opportunities for fine-tuning.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Typo yesterday. . .I shoulda wrote that it was at $166.9 million! Anyway, QoS is now less than $10,000 away from the $167 m mark--it should be there by tomorrow.
Vox clamantis in deserto
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Typo yesterday. . .I shoulda wrote that it was at $166.9 million! Anyway, QoS is now less than $10,000 away from the $167 m mark--it should be there by tomorrow.
No doubt danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com ( |) ) is hosting a strategy conference call at this very hour...it's all about grass-roots organization, getting boots on the ground, making those phone calls and knocking on those doors...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Comments
All in all and even with the recession, good on QOS. {[]
For me, it's hard to gauge success completely by comparing it with other films in the series, especially across 'eras' because there are too many other factors involved. Thunderball was the James Bond film that rode the apogee of Bond mania and it's number one because it was fueled by popularity. It's a strong film, but not considered the best by many. It would appear that Connery's Bond was quite the rage, but since then, other actors didn't fare as well. Even the Bond craze wasn't enough to push Lazenby over the top. So what contributes to a Bond film's success? Is it the character? Is it the actor? Is it the mood of audiences at the time? Most likely it's an almalgam of several factors. It's nice to see that the Bond franchise hasn't lost steam, but I'm at a loss as to what to expect from #23. As the rankings show, QoS dips from CR, as is the trend with sophomore films. Did QoS dip because of the actor? The style? audience mood? I dunno.
There's no one answer to this question, I think. Personally, I tend to believe it's the narrative pacing and 'rushed' feel of the piece. An extra fifteen minutes of character and exposition, plus a less frantic editing philosophy, probably would have added $50 million to the final take.* These are directorial issues, IMRO.
Outside of strident Bond fandom, I've not read anything negative about Craig's performance in the role---merely the usual observations that he doesn't 'look like' the other actors who've had the part---in fact, quite the opposite, so I won't buy into it being his fault. As ever, opinions will vary...
I'd also discount the recession theory. Audiences did come out to see this film; if one must suffer a 'sophomore jinx,' best to do it to the tune of half a billion dollars B-)
* An estimate snatched out of thin air, based upon nothing but the patented 'Loeffelholz Gut Instinct.'
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Way to go, Eon! {[] Now it's January, I'm curious about what they'll do next...I wonder if P & W will get the gig...again
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I for one am angst-free. . .I hope you noticed my "shockingly, shockingly" was a tongue-in-cheek tribute to Claude Rains. That said, according to BOM (which for two days didn't list QoS at all), QoS finished the year at $165.3 million, and it's continuing to rake in the funds: apparently, on New Year's Day, its take was at $165.7 m. It isn't impossible that the movie may indeed meet or surpass CR.
Also, final 2008 numbers are in, QOS finished #9 for the year in the states, and #7 worldwide. High end for modern-era Bonds, very nice. {[] Also, at $165.7m after 49 days in the US, that's nearly $9m ahead of CR at the same point in its US run (not that anybody cares or anything...).
Well said, TjustT {[]
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I still think that the right way to go with Craig's next film would be away from the "trendy" camerawork, and the "tortured soul" image of Bond, and to move it into the realm of something akin to GF or TSWLM (relatively speaking, of course; I'm not trying to say that the producers should go back to the submersible-car level of gadgetry, which I'm sure they won't anyway). However, a bit more humor, and a lighter tone would go a long way in ensuring the long-term success of the series. I think that something that combines the best elements from FRWL and GF would be just the thing for Bond23.
http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_22_japan_promos.php3?t=qos&s=qos&id=02130&id=02136
They say that ticket sales are "expected to be strong" despite a "Japanese dubbed version of the film leaking on the internet two months ago."
CR did $19 million in Japan. This could be a nice 'cherry on top' for Quantum if it can approximate that...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The NY Times today had an in-depth article on US BO being down less than 1% in dollars, but 5% in admissions this past year. Also, in a paragraph citing Sony's earnings, it called both Hancock and QOS blockbusters - no "lesser blockbuster" for QOS, just blockbuster. I guess if it underperformed at all, it wasn't enough to merit a mention in the NY Times.
I just found out it's still playing in my hometown...so it made the January benchmark I wondered aloud about a page or two ago!
Might have to go do my Bondian duty (at least) once more...I think I saw CR four times in the cinema; only three so far for QoS :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Uh, yes but QOS's drop off was much steeper than CR. It's not going to make much more than it has now as it's box office run is about finished. I think it will top CR but just barely.
Add in inflation of ticket prices over the last two years. QOS would probably have had to have earned about 175 million to equal the number of US admissions for CR. It's not going to do that. It did very well and will just pass CR's total dollar figure, but not quite as many people saw QOS in the US.
Still, for a sophomore Bond film with mixed reviews---and outright condemnation in some pockets of fandom!---it's pretty respectable.
An employee of mine told me just today that her boyfriend is taking her on a date tonight...to see QoS :007) She told me she'd seen 'most' of CR at a friend's house, but had to leave before it was over...so, being the generous boss I am, I gave her a primer on the third act of Casino, so she won't be scratching her head too much tonight when Mr. White turns up in Bond's boot
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
QoS will definitely make as much as CR. The interesting thing to look at is the number of theaters. QoS is making the same amount in 800+ theaters that CR was making in 600+ theaters. There's no disputing that QoS has done well, though, tally-wise.
Trying to weigh BO totals with inflation, initial production budget, and the film's 'staying power' is a challenge and to me comes off as something of a wash. That's why I'm so curious as to see how EON decides to proceed from this point...they have a huge buffet to sift through to determine what worked and what didn't work for QoS.
That's certainly true...I can't help but wonder what Barbara and Michael were expecting for this one, box-office wise---granted, you've got a greatly reduced (too much so?) running time, which gives the film more showings per screen...but you've also got something of a rule-breaking, frantic narrative pace, and an editing style that might not have served the film as well as hoped. In the midst of this success, there are opportunities for fine-tuning.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
No doubt danielcraigspicturenexttoamonkey.com (
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM