Thread Rating:

Poll

2 votes (13.33%)
No votes (0%)
4 votes (26.66%)
No votes (0%)
3 votes (20%)
3 votes (20%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (6.66%)
2 votes (13.33%)

15 members have voted

Gialmere
Gialmere
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
  • Threads: 44
  • Posts: 2827
Thanks for this post from:
Gandler
July 29th, 2023 at 7:52:57 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Quote: Gialmere


'Thunderball' might be considered the high water mark of the 60's spy genre. Adjusted for inflation it remained the top grossing Bond film for 47 years. In 2012 it was surpassed by 'Skyfall' which was the first Bond film to gross over 1 billion dollars worldwide. Here are the top top 10 grossing Bond films adjusted for inflation (which is easier to think of as the films that sold the most tickets)...

1) Skyfall $1,439,477,111

2) Thunderball $1,335,850,615

3) Goldfinger $1,200,699,961

4) Spectre $1,107,311,290

5) The Spy Who Loved Me $911,739,683

6) Casino Royale $911,335,643

7) You Only Live Twice $901,174,011

8) Moonraker $863,249,636

9) Diamonds Are Forever $853,565,234

10) No Time to Die $851,411,174


I should note that if you only look at US domestic gross, 'Thunderball' is still #1
link to original post



(I edited quote to focus on the list).

I get that all the Craig movies are going to be in the top 10 box office sales, this makes sense as they are more recent (so are dealing with higher populations, more people across the world with access to theatres, people can stream "movie tickets" now etc.....) But, putting these (Craig movies) aside the list is actually (more than) a bit surprising. For example, I would have guessed for sure Goldeneye would be on there.

Thunderball is a solid Connery movie (middle of the pack), not the greatest Connery (but definitely not the worst. I would say probably #3-4 of the Connery Bonds depending on how I am feeling about long underwater scenes that day.) But, it is nowhere near the best James Bond movie to the point where it should not just be #1 for decades by a wide margin, it should not even be close to the top.

I am pretty sure I will always see every James Bond movie in theaters at least once on principle (even if I know it will suck.) But, many I will happily see multiple times, Thunderball I cannot imagine watching more than once. The only reason I can see this movie being appealing is if you are fascinated with underwater stuff. And, while it does a pretty good job being loyal to the book (which it should because the Fleming -and McClory- book was literally written as a screen play, but turned in book after selling the rights to the screenplay became too drawn out.)

But for decades Thunderball, Moonraker, and Diamonds are Forever being so high for so long? Moonraker and Diamonds are Forever and probably two of the worst Bond movies of all time. Like I get box office numbers do not always correlate with critic and fan perspectives (and Bond is unique in being such a long running series over so many different cultural timelines), but this seems like a major disconnect between quality and sales (and Thunderball is a fine movie, but nowhere near the overwhelming top of all time.)

I am honestly surprised No Time to Die is not the highest of Craigs (not because it is the best -it is not-), but because of it's COVID release (and many delays), it had both a lot of hype (plus the natural hype of being the last Craig, which everyone knows means the last for at least several years), and because of COVID it was pushed that you can buy "tickets" to stream it at home during it's theatrical (which I am assuming counts towards ticket sales.)
link to original post


I imagine that piggybacking explains much of it. I wrote "60's spy genre" but meant "60's spy craze". The first two Bond films were hits, but the masterpiece 'Goldfinger' made Bond a worldwide phenomenon. 'Dr. No' and 'From Russia With Love' were quickly re-released as a double feature allowing all the new fans to catch up. So, despite its problems, 'Thunderball' was released at peak Bond demand.

'Diamonds Are Forever' simply piggybacked on THE RETURN OF SEAN CONNERY!!!

'Moonraker' piggybacked on both the success of "The Spy Who Loved Me' and (as intended) the 70's sci-fi craze via 'Star Wars'.

'Spectre', despite its silly family tree and retconning, managed to piggyback on the masterpiece 'Skyfall'.

'Goldeneye' did okay with a gross of $688,701,105. I think it suffered from both the long delay due to MGM's bankruptcy, and the box office disappointments of the Dalton films with 'License to Kill' barely out grossing the spoof 'Casino Royale' (1967).
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 1785
July 29th, 2023 at 8:50:57 PM permalink
Quote: Gialmere

Quote: Gandler

Quote: Gialmere


'Thunderball' might be considered the high water mark of the 60's spy genre. Adjusted for inflation it remained the top grossing Bond film for 47 years. In 2012 it was surpassed by 'Skyfall' which was the first Bond film to gross over 1 billion dollars worldwide. Here are the top top 10 grossing Bond films adjusted for inflation (which is easier to think of as the films that sold the most tickets)...

1) Skyfall $1,439,477,111

2) Thunderball $1,335,850,615

3) Goldfinger $1,200,699,961

4) Spectre $1,107,311,290

5) The Spy Who Loved Me $911,739,683

6) Casino Royale $911,335,643

7) You Only Live Twice $901,174,011

8) Moonraker $863,249,636

9) Diamonds Are Forever $853,565,234

10) No Time to Die $851,411,174


I should note that if you only look at US domestic gross, 'Thunderball' is still #1
link to original post



(I edited quote to focus on the list).

I get that all the Craig movies are going to be in the top 10 box office sales, this makes sense as they are more recent (so are dealing with higher populations, more people across the world with access to theatres, people can stream "movie tickets" now etc.....) But, putting these (Craig movies) aside the list is actually (more than) a bit surprising. For example, I would have guessed for sure Goldeneye would be on there.

Thunderball is a solid Connery movie (middle of the pack), not the greatest Connery (but definitely not the worst. I would say probably #3-4 of the Connery Bonds depending on how I am feeling about long underwater scenes that day.) But, it is nowhere near the best James Bond movie to the point where it should not just be #1 for decades by a wide margin, it should not even be close to the top.

I am pretty sure I will always see every James Bond movie in theaters at least once on principle (even if I know it will suck.) But, many I will happily see multiple times, Thunderball I cannot imagine watching more than once. The only reason I can see this movie being appealing is if you are fascinated with underwater stuff. And, while it does a pretty good job being loyal to the book (which it should because the Fleming -and McClory- book was literally written as a screen play, but turned in book after selling the rights to the screenplay became too drawn out.)

But for decades Thunderball, Moonraker, and Diamonds are Forever being so high for so long? Moonraker and Diamonds are Forever and probably two of the worst Bond movies of all time. Like I get box office numbers do not always correlate with critic and fan perspectives (and Bond is unique in being such a long running series over so many different cultural timelines), but this seems like a major disconnect between quality and sales (and Thunderball is a fine movie, but nowhere near the overwhelming top of all time.)

I am honestly surprised No Time to Die is not the highest of Craigs (not because it is the best -it is not-), but because of it's COVID release (and many delays), it had both a lot of hype (plus the natural hype of being the last Craig, which everyone knows means the last for at least several years), and because of COVID it was pushed that you can buy "tickets" to stream it at home during it's theatrical (which I am assuming counts towards ticket sales.)
link to original post


I imagine that piggybacking explains much of it. I wrote "60's spy genre" but meant "60's spy craze". The first two Bond films were hits, but the masterpiece 'Goldfinger' made Bond a worldwide phenomenon. 'Dr. No' and 'From Russia With Love' were quickly re-released as a double feature allowing all the new fans to catch up. So, despite its problems, 'Thunderball' was released at peak Bond demand.

'Diamonds Are Forever' simply piggybacked on THE RETURN OF SEAN CONNERY!!!

'Moonraker' piggybacked on both the success of "The Spy Who Loved Me' and (as intended) the 70's sci-fi craze via 'Star Wars'.

'Spectre', despite its silly family tree and retconning, managed to piggyback on the masterpiece 'Skyfall'.

'Goldeneye' did okay with a gross of $688,701,105. I think it suffered from both the long delay due to MGM's bankruptcy, and the box office disappointments of the Dalton films with 'License to Kill' barely out grossing the spoof 'Casino Royale' (1967).
link to original post



Those are good points. I honestly assumed Goldeneye because of the hype after such a long break. Also, the N64 game came out and made the movie crazy popular again after the initial hype (but it came out two years after the movie release, so I guess it would not have impacted box office sales even if it caused a spike of new interest for VHS sales.)

I accept that my views do not always align with the box office, for example Dalton's films are probably two of my favorites (and I can easily say License to Kill is my single favorite Bond movie. And, Dalton is by far the best Bond actor.), but I know they did terrible (not because they were bad movies, but because audiences did not like a gritty Bond after almost 15 years of Roger Moore clowning around.)

But, it is frustrating seeing such mediocre movies (when there are so many great ones) holding box office records for so long, because you know that is influencing creative decisions (I am actually surprised they went the direction that they did with Daniel Craig, though I am happy at least for the first three movies that they were willing to go back to a more realistic feel.)
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 1785
July 29th, 2023 at 9:36:59 PM permalink
Obscure Trivia: The Surgeon General published its original report on the harms of tobacco smoking in 1964, and the United States became the first nation to require a standard tobacco smoking warning on cigarettes in 1965 (cigars and other products would not be mandated until later.)

What was the only Bond film for its theatrical American release and (subsequent American video and tv releases to this day), to feature the Surgeon General's smoking warning in the end credits?

(It actually is one of the only movies ever to feature the warning on film in the credits due to the timeline and some other factors of it's release. It even may be the only movie to do it for all versions of the American release, I cannot find another example ever -even with modern standards- to release it on all American versions -theatrical, tv, and video- so it could be the only film example of this.)

(It also may be worth noting that Bond producers do not seem to like to change the end credits for the respective version on any release, because even to this day films from the Connery era incorrectly have the original "James Bond will return in X" when the next movie released ended up being something different so this could be the reason for the warning having staying power to this day).
Gialmere
Gialmere
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
  • Threads: 44
  • Posts: 2827
Thanks for this post from:
Gandler
July 30th, 2023 at 12:02:00 PM permalink
As I recall, this was one of the Dalton films which came out when cracking down on smoking became a big thing. I'll guess 'License to Kill' since Bond's cigarette lighter is a plot point.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 1785
July 30th, 2023 at 12:53:01 PM permalink
Quote: Gialmere

As I recall, this was one of the Dalton films which came out when cracking down on smoking became a big thing. I'll guess 'License to Kill' since Bond's cigarette lighter is a plot point.
link to original post



Spot on.

License to Kill is the only known Bond to have cigarette product placement (publicly known, I am sure with all of the smoking historically, all kinds of deals behind the scenes.) Receiving over 300k to have Bond smoke Larks and a pack of Larks be one of the gadgets. So, the producers voluntarily put the warning in American versions to pre-empt action from anti-tobacco groups.

At the times (80s and 90s) Dalton was a heavy cigarette smoker and wanted Bond to return to smoking cigarettes based on his readings of the book, after only smoking cigars dure Moore's years. He would be the last Bond to smoke cigarettes (with Bronson only smoking cigars on screen, and Craig never smoking at all, though allegedly a version of Casino Royale exists where Bond smokes and other characters -Craig like Dalton was a smoker at the time and thought Bond should be a smoker based on the books wanting to return to a grittier version-, but they decided to not use it, becoming the only Bond film to not feature tobacco use by any character -even background extras- despite the casino setting -in later Craig films Felix resumes smoking and several side characters are smokers-.)


https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-07-09-ca-5012-story.html
(Though this article goes on to say Roger Moore was only seen smoking a cigar in one movie, which is not accurate, so take it as you will, it is the only mainstream article on the issue that I can find.)

Also, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Bronson did a series of Lark Cigarette commercials in Japan (in English) in the 1980s and 1990s as James Bond.

In some ways Timonthy Dalton's last appearance as James Bond was 1993 (when it was assumed he was still Bond), and appeared in a Lark Advert in Japan:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StGsRt9PwbM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcwJT0JmLYY
(Roger Moore's interesting Lark Commercial)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekYde6VW3HA&t=8s
(Brosnon's 2 Lark ads)

Despite never being a huge brand in America (or the UK) now or then, in Asia these ads and product placements made an association with James Bond. (I am not sure if you can even buy Larks in America or UK anymore.) So, of all the cigarette brands Phillip Morris owned, it was an interesting choice to choose this one to associate with James Bond (and possibly a decision based primarily on the Asian market where both now and in the 80s/90s smoking was much more acceptable still and brand preferences were vastly different.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0oQGuZePlI
(LTK American end credits)
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 237
  • Posts: 15987
July 30th, 2023 at 3:52:20 PM permalink
In the 90s, I had a lot of Ecuadorian workers and they all seemed to smoke Larks.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.

  • Jump to: