The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[FormerBondFan]

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... 99x600.jpg http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... -image.jpg http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... 43x600.jpg http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... 00x421.jpg

I think I had enough seeing more stills. I want to see the final product already.

[Napoleon Solo]

Did mib3 do good or not? some say how poorly it did to lose the projected totals doing John Carter numbers overseas, others say it doing soooooo great it's unbelievably good. A $300 million movie it need John Carter numbers to break even, or the number the studio said they needed to break even, $700 million.

The final four-day weekend figure was MIB 3 was $69.3 million. It had been projected to generate $73 million in sales. I had seen some stories that said the studio initially was hoping for something in the $95 million range. Again, all of these are for an extended holiday weekend in the U.S.

[bjmdds]

IF Bond 23 does MIB:3 numbers, we are in great shape to change Bonds.

[Omega]

Did mib3 do good or not? some say how poorly it did to lose the projected totals doing John Carter numbers overseas, others say it doing soooooo great it's unbelievably good. A $300 million movie it need John Carter numbers to break even, or the number the studio said they needed to break even, $700 million.

The final four-day weekend figure was MIB 3 was $69.3 million. It had been projected to generate $73 million in sales. I had seen some stories that said the studio initially was hoping for something in the $95 million range. Again, all of these are for an extended holiday weekend in the U.S.

Did some more reading on this, it does seem they thought it'd make 80 million minimum. I don't know why its been 10 years since the last. But sony successfully spun it at a win. In some ways it is I didn't think it do half as well just because MIB 2 stank and MIB is so dated now.

Here is the thing it probably will not make money, its in QOS territory

reported budget of $250 million and promotion and marketing costs of $100-150 million

Los Angeles Times feature on the threequel, which pegs its budget (including marketing) at $375 million.

I think this weekend will tell the story of MIB 3, if it loses 60% or more it will not be remember well. It already made $200 million but it needs $700 million to $800 million to be a success. Who the hell approved these budgets, no damned way its suicidal.

If Skyfall has $230 million + promotion and marketing unless its the next avengers it hurts the series. I asked this question back when we learned the QOS cost (forgetting how bad the movie was, the star, the name), who the hell was crazy enough to say yeah, ok, go for it with that kind of budgets, these movies cost more than transformers 3 and do not have the billion dollar history. I wonder sometimes if things are purposely set up for failure like John carter or if Hollywood is this dumb. Even if they make the next OHMSS its not going to make money, in some way we shouldn't care in other we ought to be yelling at them to like the captain of the titanic, hey there is a iceberg ahead asshole! I'm talking about all hollywood but the Bond producer should know better, there best work in the last 20 years was GE, and it didn't cost half as much as the sequels to make, it you don't like ge or think CR is superior it still cost less to make than what they are said to be spending on Spyfall.

[FormerBondFan]

IF Bond 23 does MIB:3 numbers, we are in great shape to change Bonds.

It has to do worse than that.

[tehmanis]

Did mib3 do good or not? some say how poorly it did to lose the projected totals doing John Carter numbers overseas, others say it doing soooooo great it's unbelievably good. A $300 million movie it need John Carter numbers to break even, or the number the studio said they needed to break even, $700 million.

The final four-day weekend figure was MIB 3 was $69.3 million. It had been projected to generate $73 million in sales. I had seen some stories that said the studio initially was hoping for something in the $95 million range. Again, all of these are for an extended holiday weekend in the U.S.

Did some more reading on this, it does seem they thought it'd make 80 million minimum. I don't know why its been 10 years since the last. But sony successfully spun it at a win. In some ways it is I didn't think it do half as well just because MIB 2 stank and MIB is so dated now.

Here is the thing it probably will not make money, its in QOS territory

reported budget of $250 million and promotion and marketing costs of $100-150 million

Los Angeles Times feature on the threequel, which pegs its budget (including marketing) at $375 million.

I think this weekend will tell the story of MIB 3, if it loses 60% or more it will not be remember well. It already made $200 million but it needs $700 million to $800 million to be a success. Who the hell approved these budgets, no damned way its suicidal.

If Skyfall has $230 million + promotion and marketing unless its the next avengers it hurts the series. I asked this question back when we learned the QOS cost (forgetting how bad the movie was, the star, the name), who the hell was crazy enough to say yeah, ok, go for it with that kind of budgets, these movies cost more than transformers 3 and do not have the billion dollar history. I wonder sometimes if things are purposely set up for failure like John carter or if Hollywood is this dumb. Even if they make the next OHMSS its not going to make money, in some way we shouldn't care in other we ought to be yelling at them to like the captain of the titanic, hey there is a iceberg ahead asshole! I'm talking about all hollywood but the Bond producer should know better, there best work in the last 20 years was GE, and it didn't cost half as much as the sequels to make, it you don't like ge or think CR is superior it still cost less to make than what they are said to be spending on Spyfall.

you guys talk like you all representing the investor of the franchise who only care all about money not the quality of the story, no wonder most all of the member here like the worst james bond movie ever made (die another day) no matter how awful the story was or how stupid the gadgets or the incompetent actor playing it (Brosnan) as along as made a lot of money you guys just love it

[bjmdds]

Most here hated DAD, after the opening sequence TEHMANIS. However, I'd watch DAD over CR or QOS any day, because Brosnan was the second best cast Bond in the franchise and the current ungulate, with the corpulent ego, reeks from the stench of failure in the role.

[tehmanis]

because Brosnan was the second best cast Bond in the franchise

yeah right, second best cast Bond in the franchise...

Brosnan as bond:
The best pain face in the franchise
The weakest actor in fighting scenes in the franchise
The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

[English Agent]

Has anyone noticed that at the outset of SF, the budget allocated to the film was widely mentioned to of been between $100-130 mil.

It was assumed that the studio had given Eon less money to make the film after the excesses of the previous film QOS, and that is why it was mentioned that most of the filming for SF would be in England...

..............however, i notice now that boxoffice sources now say that SF's budget is $200 mil plus.

What i want to know is there a reason for the discrepancy, and if so why???????

EA

PS:- welcome to the forum 'TEHMANIS'

[Napoleon Solo]

Has anyone noticed that at the outset of SF, the budget allocated to the film was widely mentioned to of been between $100-130 mil.

It was assumed that the studio had given Eon less money to make the film after the excesses of the previous film QOS, and that is why it was mentioned that most of the filming for SF would be in England...

..............however, i notice now that boxoffice sources now say that SF's budget is $200 mil plus.

What i want to know is there a reason for the discrepancy, and if so why???????

EA

PS:- welcome to the forum 'TEHMANIS'

The Sunday Times reported in May 2011 that Eon and MGM wanted production placement to contribute one third, or $45 million, of Bond 23'd budget. Based on that, the budget would be $135 million, compared with Quantum's $230 million. The $145 million figure got repeated in newspapers in India, without saying where the figure came from.

At the November Skyfall news conference, Broccoli and Wilson denied there had been any cuts. Broccoli: "Does it look like we're cutting back?" (as if a press conference setting meant anything). Wilson said Skyfall's budget was "in the range" of Quantum's. No specific figures mentioned.

I suspect there were at least some reductions, given the first unit never went outtside of the U.K. until the last month of shooting. The second unit did all the China filming, though it appears Daniel Craig and Ola Rapace did go there to be filmed by the second unit.

Even if the budget were $200 million, that'd be a reduction of more than 10 percent from Quantum. And if it's $200 million (plus another $200 million for marketing and distribution), Sony is going to have trouble getting its money back. Daniel Craig, in defending the Heineken deal, said marketing and distribution costs are about the same as production costs.


There's a rule of thumb that a movie needs to gross three times a movie's production budget to turn a profit. **If **true, it's going to be really hard for Sony to get its money back.

[Omega]

The final four-day weekend figure was MIB 3 was $69.3 million. It had been projected to generate $73 million in sales. I had seen some stories that said the studio initially was hoping for something in the $95 million range. Again, all of these are for an extended holiday weekend in the U.S.

Did some more reading on this, it does seem they thought it'd make 80 million minimum. I don't know why its been 10 years since the last. But sony successfully spun it at a win. In some ways it is I didn't think it do half as well just because MIB 2 stank and MIB is so dated now.

Here is the thing it probably will not make money, its in QOS territory

reported budget of $250 million and promotion and marketing costs of $100-150 million

Los Angeles Times feature on the threequel, which pegs its budget (including marketing) at $375 million.

I think this weekend will tell the story of MIB 3, if it loses 60% or more it will not be remember well. It already made $200 million but it needs $700 million to $800 million to be a success. Who the hell approved these budgets, no damned way its suicidal.

If Skyfall has $230 million + promotion and marketing unless its the next avengers it hurts the series. I asked this question back when we learned the QOS cost (forgetting how bad the movie was, the star, the name), who the hell was crazy enough to say yeah, ok, go for it with that kind of budgets, these movies cost more than transformers 3 and do not have the billion dollar history. I wonder sometimes if things are purposely set up for failure like John carter or if Hollywood is this dumb. Even if they make the next OHMSS its not going to make money, in some way we shouldn't care in other we ought to be yelling at them to like the captain of the titanic, hey there is a iceberg ahead asshole! I'm talking about all hollywood but the Bond producer should know better, there best work in the last 20 years was GE, and it didn't cost half as much as the sequels to make, it you don't like ge or think CR is superior it still cost less to make than what they are said to be spending on Spyfall.

you guys talk like you all representing the investor of the franchise who only care all about money not the quality of the story, no wonder most all of the member here like the worst james bond movie ever made (die another day) no matter how awful the story was or how stupid the gadgets or the incompetent actor playing it (Brosnan) as along as made a lot of money you guys just love it

Who said a thing about DAD?
Even people who hate Brosnan admit he did damned good as Bond in DAD even if they hate DAD overall. BS troll baiting to get a rise out of certain people here.

"Quality of the story" what glue sniffing Nirvana does this coming from, quality does not come from the amount spent on it, quality and talent to make it don't have to cost an arm and a leg.
For $400 million was the quality there for QOS?

My criticism is for all of Hollywood in general, overall, $400 million dollars spend on MIB3?

The new thing for movies is to examine what the real cost are and its been growing over the last few years, new figures and facts from all angles come in to play when examining movies BO, beyond adjusting for inflation, people now triple check the cost. It's new sensationalism that people get a charge out of, John Carter and MIB 3 would half as interesting if this wasn't so.

Studio spend million of dollars to say MIB 3 numbers 1 in America, biggest opening ever, best preforming MIB ever, whatever, and a blogger and other reporters can spend 5 minuets looking it up and have a headline debunking the studio PR spin. It's fun and it going to be the next thing for some time. It's just fun to hear this or that movie made so much and show he guess what those guys at the studio are full of it. like the Star Trek reboot, did well well received but didn't make money. You might not of known that before now but it is fair to say it is interesting.

It's like Hollywood can't figure out they are in a new information age, they spin the same lies they did in the 1990s and expect us to buy them as we always have but this generation have more information and the ability to examine the lies and find the holes in statements.
If anyone expect Spyfalls opening weekend will be unscathed they are crazy, they'll be adjusting for inflation, attendance, Imax, comparing the previous openings, it's a new wold of info the studios haven't figured out how to control yet and thats more what I'm talking about than specifically criticizing the Bond budgets.

[Omega]

Has anyone noticed that at the outset of SF, the budget allocated to the film was widely mentioned to of been between $100-130 mil.

It was assumed that the studio had given Eon less money to make the film after the excesses of the previous film QOS, and that is why it was mentioned that most of the filming for SF would be in England...

..............however, i notice now that boxoffice sources now say that SF's budget is $200 mil plus.

What i want to know is there a reason for the discrepancy, and if so why???????

EA

PS:- welcome to the forum 'TEHMANIS'

The Sunday Times reported in May 2011 that Eon and MGM wanted production placement to contribute one third, or $45 million, of Bond 23'd budget. Based on that, the budget would be $135 million, compared with Quantum's $230 million. The $145 million figure got repeated in newspapers in India, without saying where the figure came from.

At the November Skyfall news conference, Broccoli and Wilson denied there had been any cuts. Broccoli: "Does it look like we're cutting back?" (as if a press conference setting meant anything). Wilson said Skyfall's budget was "in the range" of Quantum's. No specific figures mentioned.

I suspect there were at least some reductions, given the first unit never went outtside of the U.K. until the last month of shooting. The second unit did all the China filming, though it appears Daniel Craig and Ola Rapace did go there to be filmed by the second unit.

Even if the budget were $200 million, that'd be a reduction of more than 10 percent from Quantum. And if it's $200 million (plus another $200 million for marketing and distribution), Sony is going to have trouble getting its money back. Daniel Craig, in defending the Heineken deal, said marketing and distribution costs are about the same as production costs.


There's a rule of thumb that a movie needs to gross three times a movie's production budget to turn a profit. **If **true, it's going to be really hard for Sony to get its money back.

They don't have to spend a lot to make a decent movie and they may not have. MGW says they have the same QOS budget if they do it's sony's fault for oking the budget. Whatever happens it not Craig saying "Um, guys I need half a billion to make this"

[bjmdds]

Now that the major filming of Bond 23 is complete EON, MGM, and Sony had a lavish corporate dinner for all of their investors in this Mendes original project. They hired the best chefs that money could buy. Take special notice of the WEEET- BWAAAAAAAA-COLI CAKE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lumqCF2YU1g

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

Brosnan as bond:
The best pain face in the franchise
The weakest actor in fighting scenes in the franchise
The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

What is this bizarre "Brosnan Pain Face" statement? A pro-Craig member here called Stocksilvian - another Brosnan hater (although he was a big Brosnan fan and said Die Another Day was great when he first joined the old MI6 Forum) - always used to used it and I never had the faintest idea what he was going on about!!

[The Sweeney]

Brosnan as bond:
The best pain face in the franchise
The weakest actor in fighting scenes in the franchise
The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

What is this bizarre "Brosnan Pain Face" statement? A pro-Craig member here called Stocksilvian - another Brosnan hater (although he was a big Brosnan fan and said Die Another Day was great when he first joined the old MI6 Forum) - always used to used it and I never had the faintest idea what he was going on about!!

I just did a Google search for `Brosnan Pain Face' and found stuff immediately, including a dedicated video on YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hK9PBcRM9c

This may give you some idea, Cap'n....

[stockslivevan]

Brosnan as bond:
The best pain face in the franchise
The weakest actor in fighting scenes in the franchise
The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

What is this bizarre "Brosnan Pain Face" statement? A pro-Craig member here called Stocksilvian - another Brosnan hater (although he was a big Brosnan fan and said Die Another Day was great when he first joined the old MI6 Forum) - always used to used it and I never had the faintest idea what he was going on about!!

Yeah, I did like DAD. I also liked Revenge of the Sith. Past tense. Like when Katied liked Daniel Craig as Bond and saw Casino Royale multiple times. Remember that? Though I never saw DAD beyond one viewing in the theater. Even I have my limits.

My pain face meme seems to have blown out of proportion though, being used as a major criticism of the Brosnan era by many Brosnan haters in other forums. I don't see it that way. It's a microcosm of his films, but I find it pretty funny to watch from time to time because it's so OTT, especially when accompanied by his heavy breathing. Brosnan hater? No, I don't hate the guy, but I do hate his latter three films, especially TWINE.

[Mazer Rackham]

The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

Welcome to 2005, city of Complete Balderdash county of Hogwash. Even Mikey said this was not true. Brozza was not unreasonable and initial salary requests were not far from his DAD salary which MGM was more than willing to pony up.

[bjmdds]

FBF, get Nagini ready now.

[katied]

Yoo couldn't pay me enough to see Spyfail in the movie theater. Like I said,that's $10 that could be better spent elsewhere(but I'm sure someone here will be brave enough to take one for the team. )

[Mazer Rackham]

Brosnan as bond:
The best pain face in the franchise
The weakest actor in fighting scenes in the franchise
The best actor who know how to demand high salaries in the franchise and didn't get it

What is this bizarre "Brosnan Pain Face" statement? A pro-Craig member here called Stocksilvian - another Brosnan hater (although he was a big Brosnan fan and said Die Another Day was great when he first joined the old MI6 Forum) - always used to used it and I never had the faintest idea what he was going on about!!

Yeah, I did like DAD. I also liked Revenge of the Sith. Past tense. Like when Katied liked Daniel Craig as Bond and saw Casino Royale multiple times. Remember that? Though I never saw DAD beyond one viewing in the theater. Even I have my limits.

My pain face meme seems to have blown out of proportion though, being used as a major criticism of the Brosnan era by many Brosnan haters in other forums. I don't see it that way. It's a microcosm of his films, but I find it pretty funny to watch from time to time because it's so OTT, especially when accompanied by his heavy breathing. Brosnan hater? No, I don't hate the guy, but I do hate his latter three films, especially TWINE.

Ah, after Cubby died he was in the hands of incompetents.

Reminds me, where the hell are those other two movie the Wonder Twins owe Sony? There were three to four movies EON announced they were going to produce but nothing has happened. Are they holding off hoping Sony will go bankrupt first?