That's why you aren't heading a movie production. Box office is what makes or breaks a movie and franchise.
It's 2020, not 2000. Movies should come out on streaming at same time as the theater. They would make more money doing this as there is limited seating in theaters and this way no one has to travel. Do it the way they did The Irishman.
I'm not convinced, my friend, but free to quote numbers that show any franchise has made more in streaming than box office in the last 5 years. Bond is in the same ballpark as Marvel, who rake in between $500 million to a billion $ in box office revenue internationally per movie these days or its considered a flop.
When I moved to Columbus the first time (of three) in the summer of 1990 there were maybe 40 movie theater screens scattered around this town. Late in the decade at the same time people were buying their first DVD players the theater chains were building 20-30 screen cinemaplex's on every street corner. I have no idea what keeps the theaters open now. Actually, that's not true. I know exactly whats keeping the theaters open. Gimmicks are keeping the theaters open. AMC theaters were showing NFL football games last season. There is far more alcohol flowing at the theater than when I was a kid. Stadium seating, 3D, 60 fps projection. It's all gimmicks.
The Irishman grossed an estimated $7 million in North America and $961,224 in other territories, for a worldwide total of $8 million. Budget to make, $159 million.
No one's really been James Bond unless they've said "This is my last "...and then turned around to do another one (haha). I could see Craig maybe doing one more, sure. Unlike others who've played Bond, Craig's more than a well paid employee of the firm - he's been given a seat at the table. The paychecks probably aren't too shabby either, but the main point is Craig's treated as a collaborator, not another fancy piece of production design. He's not everyone's favorite 007 - certainly not in these forums - but Craig's Bond movies made a lot of people a lot of money and bringing in a new Bond, while tradition, is still a big risk. If Craig's keeping his options open, I bet EON's accountants have been ordered to do the same. Craig probably is done, though. He can't seem to get through making a new Bond movie without breaking something and at 52, starting to look his age (then again, Craig looked like he was 50 when he was 40).
If Craig returns, it'll be the first time two Bond actors have finished with the same number of films. As it stands now... Moore: 7 Connery: 6 [not counting the non-EON film] Craig: 5 Brosnan: 4 Dalton: 2 Lazenby: 1 And if Craig doesn't return, maybe the next guy can do only three films and give us a full sweep.
And the value of his contribution as a co-producer is shown on "Spectre", one of the best Bond films The sooner he goes away, the better. If he does another one, when could it be released? 2026? The franchise has been moving at snail pace for too long, partly to wait for him to be ready to work. Sir Roger Moore made 5 movies in his 50s; while one may argue about their quality, no doubt that Moore was a trooper, more than willing to work and not whining about slashing his wrists if he had to do another one. Craig also said that playing 007 is the best job in the world, that's even better if you go to work when you want to, and have the producers begging for you to return. And taking advatage of it to get more money. I miss Cubby; Catherine Deneuve could have worked on "The spy who loved me" but wanted $ 250,000. He offered less than $ 100,000, Deneuve refused and cast Bach instead. Saved a lot of money and made one of the greatest Bond movies nonetheless. He knew how to treat clowns and people that could hurt the franchise, and I bet that if he were alive he should've shown Craig the door a long time ago. I should add the I consider Craig a great actor, just not totally right to be Bond.
I see Hollywood films are even delayed till 2022. Hollywood must be crying in its beer with lost revenue.
If it comes out 2022, it will be five years old. Supposed to come out December 2018... then kept getting postponed.
I think the story was never true, and I think (as with most things in Hollywoo), it's all a question of money and negotiation. It's rare that you can't throw a lot of money at a problem and make it disappear. I think in Daniel Craig's case, they just kept increasing the money until it became "an offer he couldn't refuse."
I was reading about this recently, they still claim Nov, but I doubt it. For my money, Craig is the best Bond ever. I grew up with Connery and saw half of his films when they were released, but the latest batch of Bond films has successfully (IMO) modernized the character to the point that 3 of the 4 Craig films are among the best Bond films ever. I love the way they have re-booted the characters while paying homage to the earlier films. If Craig want to do another one they should pony up.
Even if theatres are open, will people re-enter theaters in the numbers necessary to make a DC/Marvel/Bond franchise installment successful? Those things have to do hundreds of millions the first month to work out for the studio. I wonder if this virus will put the kibosh on these kind of movies until further notice. Not just because the productions are shuttered, but because the payoff is now in doubt.
This is literally the "gold mine you can't dig up". I'm sure that's how EON and the producers of other major franchises (Wonder Woman springs to mind) must be feeling right now. Their movies are in the can, ready to go...and yet there seems to be no bottom to the hole they've fallen into. Today's worry isn't "if you show it will they come" but rather "where will you show it?". The major cinema chains could still pull something off - I wrote in another thread about strategies involving timed entry, strict audience capacity limits, multiple showings of individual films, and selling tickets only online - but all or any combination of those would be no assurance of safety for audiences or guarantee profit for the studios. As for Bond and Daniel Craig, I could see EON making an offer to Daniel Craig for a 6th movie, sure. After all the chaos and uncertainty caused by the coronavirus, I'm not sure the Broccoli family would want to invite more risk by installing a new actor in the role. People have their opinions of Daniel Craig as Bond - and they're welcome to them - but his track record at the box office isn't a matter of debate.
And also his track record of the last 14 years at the box office when he's not playing Bond isn't a matter of debate, eg Cowboys and Aliens, Invasion, Dream House. His non Bond films all lost money at the B.O., except for Knives Out. People won't pay money to just to see Craig on the big screen. And Cowboys and Aliens is one of the most expensive box office flops of all time
The point was - and is - people do pay to see Daniel Craig as James Bond. And Craig's still working outside of Bond, so I don't think Cowboys & Aliens has been any kind of albatross around his neck. ...but yeah, Craig's not nearly as much of a draw when he isn't Bond (a situation not unique to Craig) but seems like he's adapted, picking ensemble films like Knives Out (which will get a sequel) and Logan Lucky.
