Of course Goldeneye had far better ticket sales...and not only for the reason stated above...
A new Bond ALWAYS garners more attention...and the PR team hit overdrive with Goldeneye...it was everywhere...even The S*n (excuse me while I'm sick) had Goldeneye Bingo running for a fair number of weeks and also drip fed articles and pictures at the same time...add this to the best Bond teaser trailer (probably) ever...and the hype was unbelievable...NOW add all that to the six year gap...and...
As for which Bond the American public liked better in the role well the numbers are what the numbers are, it's Brozzer in a 2nd round knockout. NOT EVEN CLOSE Goldeneye did 3 times the ticket sales. :v :v :v
I have a feeling (and it's just a feeling) that this has something to do with the unprecedented six year absence. People miss it enough to care. I didn't particularly think much of Goldeneye as a film, but hell, I went to the cinema to watch it. It had been too long.
Of course Goldeneye had far better ticket sales...and not only for the reason stated above...
A new Bond ALWAYS garners more attention...and the PR team hit overdrive with Goldeneye...it was everywhere...even The S*n (excuse me while I'm sick) had Goldeneye Bingo running for a fair number of weeks and also drip fed articles and pictures at the same time...add this to the best Bond teaser trailer (probably) ever...and the hype was unbelievable...NOW add all that to the six year gap...and...
Even with all the overdrive hype of Goldeneye it really is hard to argue against the fact that Pierce was the much more popular Bond with the American movie going public. LTD was 13 mil in tix LTK was 8+ in tix. Goldeneye was 24 mil + and TND was over 26 mil +.
So even with the long delay and heavy media blitz, Brosnan's Bond seemed to resonate with the American audience in a way that that Dalton clearly didn't. People went to see Brozzer in the role and relayed good word of mouth, thus when TND came out it did even stronger box office. Both GE and TND did more American tix sales than TLD & LTK combined. I don't think there is anyway of getting around the fact that for whatever reason the American audience just did not take to Daltons Bond. But they also think OHMSS is one of the worst Bond films ever, so what do they know :v :v :v
Now I'm going to watch LTK and wish it had the budget of AVTAK or GE. At one point LTK was in my top 5, but through the years I just can't help but notice some of the flaws with the film that were a direct result of UA/MGM's budget problems. Still top 10 though B-) B-) B-)
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,756Chief of Staff
Even with all the overdrive hype of Goldeneye it really is hard to argue against the fact that Pierce was the much more popular Bond with the American movie going public. LTD was 13 mil in tix LTK was 8+ in tix. Goldeneye was 24 mil + and TND was over 26 mil +.
So even with the long delay and heavy media blitz, Brosnan's Bond seemed to resonate with the American audience in a way that that Dalton clearly didn't. People went to see Brozzer in the role and relayed good word of mouth, thus when TND came out it did even stronger box office. Both GE and TND did more American tix sales than TLD & LTK combined. I don't think there is anyway of getting around the fact that for whatever reason the American audience just did not take to Daltons Bond. But they also think OHMSS is one of the worst Bond films ever, so what do they know :v :v :v
Well...that is EXACTLY what the media blitz is supposed to do
Both TLD and LTK didn't have that...especially LTK which had a very poor media campaign.
Also factor in that it had a new director and different cast members (new M and Moneypenny, etc)...
Not sure about the US but in the UK many more cinema multiplex's were built in that 6 year gap too - so more screens and bigger screens too...it may be small...but it all adds up
:v you are grabbing anything to make Dalton the stinker look better, don't you, Sir Miles?
What's next?
Global warming and therefore more people in the a/c cinemas?
The invention of microfibers to make cinema seats more comfy?
The invention of Coke light?
)
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,756Chief of Staff
:v you are grabbing anything to make Dalton the stinker look better, don't you, Sir Miles?
What's next?
Global warming and therefore more people in the a/c cinemas?
The invention of microfibers to make cinema seats more comfy?
The invention of Coke light?
)
Don't have to, bondtoys...you seem to be in the minority with your thoughts.....pulling out random quotes from Lord knows where to try and prop up your naive ramblings
I come with facts...you come with fan-boy nonsense {:)
I come with facts...you come with fan-boy nonsense {:)
...and you love your killerphrases
The fact, that Batman, Die Hard, Leathal weapon and Indiana Jones (did someone mention E.T. from 1982?) did well in the times of the "cinematic shoeboxes" speaks against your "fact-loaden" arguments why LTK sucked in the US (and in Germany by the way).
When I come up with a light-spirited comment about your reasoning for this, I am getting shot down for fanboy-dom.
There are movies, which have been accepted by the audience and some, which have not. LTK particularly and TLD are of the last.
I have emailed you ONE source via pm and it may not have been the best. But that over-generalisation above is obviously more silly than any nonsense from my side and kills every reasonable discussion.
I suggest, that you re-read my lines and differentiate. I was mostly talking about my experience and feelings while others claim facts to be on your side by not providing ONE single link
As for the 6-years absence, I was trying to voice some counter-opinion which obviously was not welcomed here.
I come with facts...you come with fan-boy nonsense {:)
...and you love your killerphrases
The fact, that Batman, Die Hard, Leathal weapon and Indiana Jones (did someone mention E.T. from 1982?) did well in the times of the "cinematic shoeboxes" speaks against your "fact-loaden" arguments why LTK sucked in the US (and in Germany by the way).
Again, bondtoys, you decide to mis-read what I post to try and prop up your ridiculous arguement
Remember LTK took MORE money in North America than TLD did...so it didn't quite suck as bad as you think
ALL the films you mention took more money BECAUSE THEY HAD A FAR GREATER MEDIA BUDGET !
When I come up with a light-spirited comment about your reasoning for this, I am getting shot down for fanboy-dom.
There are movies, which have been accepted by the audience and some, which have not. LTK particularly and TLD are of the last.
I have emailed you ONE source via pm and it may not have been the best. But that over-generalisation above is obviously more silly than any nonsense from my side and kills every reasonable discussion.
Yes well, the 'source' 8-) you emailed has NO CREDABILITY at all...you may as well have emailed me one of your rantings )
Which "over-generalisation" is that ?
I suggest, that you re-read my lines and differentiate. I was mostly talking about my experience and feelings while others claim facts to be on your side by not providing ONE single link
As for the 6-years absence, I was trying to voice some counter-opinion which obviously was not welcomed here.
It's very difficult to link to newspapers that are from a time BEFORE the internet...the real facts are out there...you just chose to ignore them...that's up to you...still doesn't change the fact that I'm right... ...don't worry bondtoys, you will get used to that )
And I hope the above link is far better than the last one you sent me :v
Octopussy U.S. ticket sales 21.5 million
AVTK " " 14.1 million
TLD " " 13.1 million
LTK " " 8.7 million
Goldeneye " " 24.5million
That link (The Memory of Danger) by the way was plain fanboy-stupidity and it was not provided by me
So, the media budget budget was lower?
Interesting! So, it was not the movie, it was just the media budget? Yes, the small media budget was fact as was the invention of Diet Coke. I am missing the point or better facts, that and how much a smaller media budget (and the presence of Diet Coke) influences the box office of a movie. And does it affect more than the acceptance of the main actor?
Was possibly the main actor a reason, why the media budget was so small and not to keep within the budget?
And how much is the effect like previously drawn: See the new actor in the first movie --> high box office but pass on the second one when you don't like him? Is that effect larger than the low media budget?
You see, facts are seldom leading in 1 direction, there are more options to interpret them
As for you referring to UK newspapers? Kidding? Yes?
UK newspapers are well-known for their independent reporting on entertainment topics plus press releases from the studios don't necessary bear the truth. So I doubt, if that source is better than some random opinion on an internet page.
I for my part will leave this discussion now and leave it to the fanboys to celebrate their embarrassing hero. Enjoy -{
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,756Chief of Staff
bondtoys, bondtoys, bondtoys 8-)
TLD still took enough money for Dalton to stay in the role and for MGM/Eon to make another
And even good movies slip under the radar because of a poor media budget...all the other films that were mentioned and were released at the same time would have had AT LEAST 10 times the media budget of LTK...and in the face of that media onslaught LTK missed out.....that's why the Bond movies moved away from Summer releases...that much MGM/Eon have confirmed
I'm sure they would have loved a much larger media budget...but, back then as now, MGM were cash-strapped ! Facts again, bondtoys...not ramblings or mischief making
The facts are plain as day...and can only lead to the one conclusion...it's not my fault you choose not to see it...bondtoys, you need to remove these --> B-) )
I see you have left this thread now you are bereft of more nonsense
Yeah Miles, but it wasn't just the media budget that caused it to suffer. It's overall film production budget compared to other films in 89 is clearly lacking. That is NOT something you can say about most of the Bond Films ( 71-74 excluded ). Thus the casual Bond audience just didn't respond to it that well. They would watch LTK compared, to say Batman, and go THAT was a Bond film. It looked small. Nobody said TSWLM looked small compared to Starwars.
I have a soft spot for LTK, being that I am on the more realistic side of the Bond ledger ( & I saw it with someone very special to me ). I used to really have it ranked up in the upper, upper echelon. But I have a habit of seeing how a Bond film ages to really get a sense of them ( I am sure I am like alot of people on this site in that I have seen all of the films at LEAST 20-25 times, minus QOS, but I have seen it at least a dozen times ).
The one factor that I just can't get past with LTK, which has caused it to fall a bit for me personally, is the films budget or lack there of. AVTAK & TLD both had FAR larger operating budgets than LTK and I think it shows in the reruns. Where I think TLD is a strong movie with WEEEEAAAAAKKK villains. I think LTK was set up to fail from the get go. Hence IT really splits fans. There really is no middle ground it seems with Dalton & LTK in particular among the diehard fans. I sometimes think the LTK diehards see it for the film IT COULD have been, as opposed to the film it was.
As for the poster who said Sir Sean mailed it in, well maybe he did from YOLT onward, but he set the template in YOLT that would prove Bond box office gold through the early 80's. Everyone likes to blame RM for making Bond over the top, but ol Sean did it first. Plus he gets a pass in my book for making FRWL-TB, which I think are the 3 strongest Bond films back, to back, to back in the entire film catalog.
Sorry if I got a little winded, but my power has been out for 2 days because of hurricane Irene, So I AM trying to get my Bond fix in all in one post.
{[] {[] {[]
...for example, would Brosnan have survived the 6 year hiatus ? Probably not. And Dalton's Bond wiped the board clean for Brosnan to play the part how he wanted too...without the spectre of Moore on his shoulder...
Well, one could say it that way:
Without Dalton, there would not have been the need for a 6 year-long break :v
Possibly Dalton wiped much - including the franchise - almost out :v
If you are asking me, Daltons appearance kept people off from Bond. He bored people - most of them almost
The 6 year wait was because of ua and mgm's arguments, not Daltons fault.
"You're in the wrong business... leave it to the professionals!"
James Bond- Licence To Kill
Comments
And I do LOVE a redhead -{
Except two...her and Mick Hucknall
Even with all the overdrive hype of Goldeneye it really is hard to argue against the fact that Pierce was the much more popular Bond with the American movie going public. LTD was 13 mil in tix LTK was 8+ in tix. Goldeneye was 24 mil + and TND was over 26 mil +.
So even with the long delay and heavy media blitz, Brosnan's Bond seemed to resonate with the American audience in a way that that Dalton clearly didn't. People went to see Brozzer in the role and relayed good word of mouth, thus when TND came out it did even stronger box office. Both GE and TND did more American tix sales than TLD & LTK combined. I don't think there is anyway of getting around the fact that for whatever reason the American audience just did not take to Daltons Bond. But they also think OHMSS is one of the worst Bond films ever, so what do they know :v :v :v
Well...that is EXACTLY what the media blitz is supposed to do
Both TLD and LTK didn't have that...especially LTK which had a very poor media campaign.
Also factor in that it had a new director and different cast members (new M and Moneypenny, etc)...
Not sure about the US but in the UK many more cinema multiplex's were built in that 6 year gap too - so more screens and bigger screens too...it may be small...but it all adds up
What's next?
Global warming and therefore more people in the a/c cinemas?
The invention of microfibers to make cinema seats more comfy?
The invention of Coke light?
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Don't have to, bondtoys...you seem to be in the minority with your thoughts.....pulling out random quotes from Lord knows where to try and prop up your naive ramblings
I come with facts...you come with fan-boy nonsense {:)
The surly Scot himself
Sir Sean Connery
{[] {[]
Connery had had enough by the time of Thunderball, and quit the role during the making of the next movie, some Bond legend.
Being first in line don't necessarily signify you are the best or greatest of any one thing.
...and you love your killerphrases
The fact, that Batman, Die Hard, Leathal weapon and Indiana Jones (did someone mention E.T. from 1982?) did well in the times of the "cinematic shoeboxes" speaks against your "fact-loaden" arguments why LTK sucked in the US (and in Germany by the way).
When I come up with a light-spirited comment about your reasoning for this, I am getting shot down for fanboy-dom.
There are movies, which have been accepted by the audience and some, which have not. LTK particularly and TLD are of the last.
I have emailed you ONE source via pm and it may not have been the best. But that over-generalisation above is obviously more silly than any nonsense from my side and kills every reasonable discussion.
I suggest, that you re-read my lines and differentiate. I was mostly talking about my experience and feelings while others claim facts to be on your side by not providing ONE single link
As for the 6-years absence, I was trying to voice some counter-opinion which obviously was not welcomed here.
As for the fanboy-dom: I'll leave this to:
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Again, bondtoys, you decide to mis-read what I post to try and prop up your ridiculous arguement
Remember LTK took MORE money in North America than TLD did...so it didn't quite suck as bad as you think
ALL the films you mention took more money BECAUSE THEY HAD A FAR GREATER MEDIA BUDGET !
There - block capitals, can't miss it this time
Yes well, the 'source' 8-) you emailed has NO CREDABILITY at all...you may as well have emailed me one of your rantings
Which "over-generalisation" is that ?
It's very difficult to link to newspapers that are from a time BEFORE the internet...the real facts are out there...you just chose to ignore them...that's up to you...still doesn't change the fact that I'm right...
And I hope the above link is far better than the last one you sent me :v
Hats on {:)
TLD totaled much better than LTK but still was a bad performer compared to all other, which have been before.
That link (The Memory of Danger) by the way was plain fanboy-stupidity and it was not provided by me
So, the media budget budget was lower?
Interesting! So, it was not the movie, it was just the media budget? Yes, the small media budget was fact as was the invention of Diet Coke. I am missing the point or better facts, that and how much a smaller media budget (and the presence of Diet Coke) influences the box office of a movie. And does it affect more than the acceptance of the main actor?
Was possibly the main actor a reason, why the media budget was so small and not to keep within the budget?
And how much is the effect like previously drawn: See the new actor in the first movie --> high box office but pass on the second one when you don't like him? Is that effect larger than the low media budget?
You see, facts are seldom leading in 1 direction, there are more options to interpret them
As for you referring to UK newspapers? Kidding? Yes?
UK newspapers are well-known for their independent reporting on entertainment topics plus press releases from the studios don't necessary bear the truth. So I doubt, if that source is better than some random opinion on an internet page.
I for my part will leave this discussion now and leave it to the fanboys to celebrate their embarrassing hero. Enjoy -{
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
TLD still took enough money for Dalton to stay in the role and for MGM/Eon to make another
And even good movies slip under the radar because of a poor media budget...all the other films that were mentioned and were released at the same time would have had AT LEAST 10 times the media budget of LTK...and in the face of that media onslaught LTK missed out.....that's why the Bond movies moved away from Summer releases...that much MGM/Eon have confirmed
I'm sure they would have loved a much larger media budget...but, back then as now, MGM were cash-strapped ! Facts again, bondtoys...not ramblings or mischief making
The facts are plain as day...and can only lead to the one conclusion...it's not my fault you choose not to see it...bondtoys, you need to remove these --> B-)
I see you have left this thread now you are bereft of more nonsense
Enjoy your Diet Coke
I have a soft spot for LTK, being that I am on the more realistic side of the Bond ledger ( & I saw it with someone very special to me ). I used to really have it ranked up in the upper, upper echelon. But I have a habit of seeing how a Bond film ages to really get a sense of them ( I am sure I am like alot of people on this site in that I have seen all of the films at LEAST 20-25 times, minus QOS, but I have seen it at least a dozen times ).
The one factor that I just can't get past with LTK, which has caused it to fall a bit for me personally, is the films budget or lack there of. AVTAK & TLD both had FAR larger operating budgets than LTK and I think it shows in the reruns. Where I think TLD is a strong movie with WEEEEAAAAAKKK villains. I think LTK was set up to fail from the get go. Hence IT really splits fans. There really is no middle ground it seems with Dalton & LTK in particular among the diehard fans. I sometimes think the LTK diehards see it for the film IT COULD have been, as opposed to the film it was.
As for the poster who said Sir Sean mailed it in, well maybe he did from YOLT onward, but he set the template in YOLT that would prove Bond box office gold through the early 80's. Everyone likes to blame RM for making Bond over the top, but ol Sean did it first. Plus he gets a pass in my book for making FRWL-TB, which I think are the 3 strongest Bond films back, to back, to back in the entire film catalog.
Sorry if I got a little winded, but my power has been out for 2 days because of hurricane Irene, So I AM trying to get my Bond fix in all in one post.
{[] {[] {[]
The 6 year wait was because of ua and mgm's arguments, not Daltons fault.
James Bond- Licence To Kill