The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Kristatos]

I just think the Bond franchise is too big to dwindle that much after 1 movie. The general movie audience have short memories too. DAD was an absolute shocker, yet look how much CR raked in on the back of it - AND without Pierce Brosnan at the helm.

And look at the opening weekends of QoS worldwide when that came out.

And look at the second weekend drops once people realised.

Contrary to the revisionist history being put out since CR was released, DAD was fairly well received at the time. Not hailed as a classic, perhaps, but it had a better reputation in 2002 than it does now. And even if it wasn't, it's unlikely that it would have affected CR's takings that much, since CR was promoted as a conscious break with the past, with a new actor in the lead. Nothing I've heard about Bond 23 so far suggests that EON have learned anything from their mistakes in QOS.

[Kristatos]

Brosnan bashing is strictly not allowed, and anyone who dare to do so, is totally demented

How is it not allowed? Was Nash banned? Were his posts removed? No, he just got argued with, that's all. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. The Brosnan-bashers seem to want to go unchallenged, and see any counter-arguments as evidence of persecution.

[Kristatos]

By the way, the next 2 HP films will follow Avatar and be in 3-D.

Do you have a reliable source for that? The HP films have already started shooting, from what I understand, so to have to scrap the whole thing and start again in 3D sounds a little unlikely to me.

[The Sweeney]

Brosnan bashing is strictly not allowed, and anyone who dare to do so, is totally demented

How is it not allowed? Was Nash banned? Were his posts removed? No, he just got argued with, that's all. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. The Brosnan-bashers seem to want to go unchallenged, and see any counter-arguments as evidence of persecution.

My post was aimed particularly at Oscarman, who couldn't handle someone else slagging off Brozza, but in the same post open fired on Craig.

I have no problem with Craig bashers on here, as I openly bash Brozza in the same manner. It's just that I don't think Oscarman can handle seeing Brozza being slagged off, yet by the same token has no problems whatsoever in putting the boot in where Craig is concerned - hence my claim that he has double standards.

[The Sweeney]

I just think the Bond franchise is too big to dwindle that much after 1 movie. The general movie audience have short memories too. DAD was an absolute shocker, yet look how much CR raked in on the back of it - AND without Pierce Brosnan at the helm.

And look at the opening weekends of QoS worldwide when that came out.

And look at the second weekend drops once people realised.

Contrary to the revisionist history being put out since CR was released, DAD was fairly well received at the time. Not hailed as a classic, perhaps, but it had a better reputation in 2002 than it does now. And even if it wasn't, it's unlikely that it would have affected CR's takings that much, since CR was promoted as a conscious break with the past, with a new actor in the lead. Nothing I've heard about Bond 23 so far suggests that EON have learned anything from their mistakes in QOS.

Even if Bond 23 is worse than QoS, it will still bring in the huge worldwide numbers. The franchise is too strong to let one film affect it.

Besides which, quite a bit of time will have passed before the release of Bond 23. Audiences will be ready for another Bond film by the time it is finally released.
QoS will be a distant memory, and audiences will go and see `the new James Bond film' as they always do. Like it or not, Bond movies are an event when they come out, regardless of who is playing Bond, or how bad the movie could be.

[Kristatos]

Even if Bond 23 is worse than QoS, it will still bring in the huge worldwide numbers. The franchise is too strong to let one film affect it.

Organic fertiliser of bovine origin. TMWTGG almost sank the franchise and so, much as I liked it, did LTK. Luckily, both times they managed to come back with strong follow-ups that rescued Bond (TSWLM and GE respectively), but in order to do that, they first had to realise that change was necessary. Does the current regime have the nous to do that?

[Mazer Rackham]

By the way, the next 2 HP films will follow Avatar and be in 3-D.

Do you have a reliable source for that? The HP films have already started shooting, from what I understand, so to have to scrap the whole thing and start again in 3D sounds a little unlikely to me.

There is a conversion possess. Lucas is supposedly trying it on this Star Wars Films, with limited success. or so they say. So far Warner has not confirmed anything.
A true 3d movie needs to be conceived of and filmed that way from the start, like Avatar was. Also their are mixed studies about people not reacting well to 3D. Avatar may end up being fluke and not the start of a new moving making trend, although Hollywood will pile on and try it with everything like it's the new mayonnaise.

Next "Harry Potter" movies coming in 3D
Carl DiOrio
Wed Jan 27, 2010 3:37am EST


British actors Rupert Grint (L-R), Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe arrive for the world premiere of ''Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince'' at Leicester Square in London in this July 7, 2009 file photo. REUTERS/Luke MacGregor

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Warner Bros. will release the next two "Harry Potter" films in 3D, a move underscoring the post-"Avatar" rush for extra-dimensional box office returns.

Entertainment | Film

Studio executives around town have been scrutinizing film slates for opportunities to expand forays into 3D releasing. Warners has been testing footage from its upcoming "Clash of the Titans" -- converted into 3D by an outside vendor -- and the tests have gone so well that the studio has decided to release not only "Titans" but also the two-part "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" in 3D.

Warners refused to confirm the decisions Tuesday, but an announcement on "Titans" -- a co-production with studio-based producer Legendary Pictures -- is expected by week's end. Official word on the "Potter" pics also is awaited.

Conversion expenses have been coming down, so each film will cost just $5 million to change into 3D. Warners also will absorb an additional $5 million expense per picture to pay for 3D glasses for exhibitors handling the movies.

In a related move, Warners will push back the release of "Titans" one week to April 2. "Deathly Hallows: Part I" is set to unspool November 19, and "Part II" is slotted for July 15, 2011.

The only previous "Potter" pic to dabble in 3D was last year's "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," which included brief footage viewable in 3D in Imax venues. It was unclear whether "Potter" author J.K. Rowling had to OK the move into the third dimension.

As for the impact on box office prospects for the final two "Potter" sequels, consider the more imminent situation with "Titans."

A remake of a 1981 film starring Laurence Olivier, "Titans" previously might have been expected to fetch no more than $200 million domestically, and even that was an aggressive projection. Released in 3D, Warners figures to reap well north of $200 million, with 2007's $211 million domestic grosser "300" considered a beatable benchmark.

"Titans" in 3D also is considered a safe bet to best the $245 million in foreign coin that Warners fetched with "300."

The "Titans" move is not without risk. The installed base of 3D movie screens has been growing rapidly, but it's not sufficient to release the film entirely in 3D.

That should be less of a concern by the time the next "Potter" hits multiplexes. But execs also are quietly confident of getting enough 3D playdates for "Titans."

"I would not think it would be an issue to establish ourselves in the 3D marketplace with 'Titans,'" a studio insider said. "By sliding it back a week, we should at least have enough screens in the major markets."

Warners should secure upward of 1,000 playdates for "Titans," which will unspool a week after Paramount bows DreamWorks Animation's spring tentpole "How to Train Your Dragon."

The "Titans" move might spur further reshuffling in the spring release calendar, as its new date makes for a fifth wide opener set for Easter weekend, which historically is a solid boxoffice session but hardly one to support that many big pics.

Other wide openers set for April 2 include Fox's "Diary of a Wimpy Kid," a likely PG-rated film adapted from a book series popular with middle-schoolers; Disney's PG-rated Miley Cyrus starrer "The Last Song," adapted from a Nicholas Sparks novel; Universal's futuristic action thriller "Repo Men," starring Jude Law and Forest Whitaker; and Lionsgate's latest Tyler Perry pic, "Why Did I Get Married Too?"

Meantime, the move of "Potter" into the extra dimension could prompt other high-profile moves. Could a 3D James Bond loom?

Warners' decision with its "Potter" franchise is likely at least to prompt 3D discussions between MGM and 007 producers. But unlike Warners' incremental move with the "Potter" franchise -- going with full-on 3D only after an initial foray into partial Imax 3D -- Lion execs would be starting at square one in talks on Bond.

Still, there is the siren call of those extra-dimensional dollars -- and other 3D currencies. In addition to lusting after "Avatar"-like boxoffice, industry execs have taken note of how well 3D pics play overseas.

Warners 3D horror pic "The Final Destination" overperformed internationally this summer, and Sony's 2D "Zombieland" did less than one-fourth as well overseas as domestically a few months later.

Perhaps by no coincidence, Sony might send "Spider-Man" into the third dimension with the webslinger's next pic.

[The Sweeney]

Even if Bond 23 is worse than QoS, it will still bring in the huge worldwide numbers. The franchise is too strong to let one film affect it.

Organic fertiliser of bovine origin. TMWTGG almost sank the franchise and so, much as I liked it, did LTK. Luckily, both times they managed to come back with strong follow-ups that rescued Bond (TSWLM and GE respectively), but in order to do that, they first had to realise that change was necessary. Does the current regime have the nous to do that?

I sincerely hope so. I have heard rumours that Craig was very unhappy with the reviews of QoS. Even if Babs & Co. think they are invincible, and bury their heads in the sand, it appears as though right now Craig holds enough power to voice his concerns - and Babs listens to him.

I am hoping he has voiced his concerns loud enough. Judging by the hiring of Morgan, and the attempt to hire Mendes, it is certainly a foot in the right direction.

I was not happy at all with QoS, and one more bad Bond movie is enough to make me wash my hands of the entire franchise.

[bjmdds]

That's not all she does with Craig I bet. Sweene, is QOS, aka TBM, in the bottom 2 of all Bond 23 films including NSNA? Funny thing Sweene is you just like a handful of the films. Until Craig, I enjoyed ALL of them, with Dalton's two my least favorite BUT they are tolerable. You seem to have a LIMITED ECLECTIC ONE STYLE taste in the Bond genre. That is fine but it limits your tolerance outside of your norm. Craig has NO business being Bond, yet he appeals to your eclectic Bond taste whereas most here detest his presence on the screen and find it an insult to our collective Bond psyche. By the way, where's MP?

[The Sweeney]

That's not all she does with Craig I bet. Sweene, is QOS, aka TBM, in the bottom 2 of all Bond 23 films including NSNA? Funny thing Sweene is you just like a handful of the films. Until Craig, I enjoyed ALL of them, with Dalton's two my least favorite BUT they are tolerable. You seem to have a LIMITED ECLECTIC ONE STYLE taste in the Bond genre. That is fine but it limits your tolerance outside of your norm. Craig has NO business being Bond, yet he appeals to your eclectic Bond taste whereas most here detest his presence on the screen and find it an insult to our collective Bond psyche. By the way, where's MP?

Funny enough, I have just finished watching GE, and it was a lot better than I remembered it.
As for QoS, it is nowhere near as good as CR, but I still prefer it to Moore's and Brozza's.

Who is MP? Katied?

[carl stromberg]

By the way, where's MP?

Having a one day break from the forum.

[The Sweeney]

By the way, where's MP?

Having a one day break from the forum.

A break by choice....or a break by force, Carl?

[carl stromberg]

Let's just say it was for my own sanity!

[The Sweeney]

Let's just say it was for my own sanity!

I don't think you were alone feeling that way, Carl....

[Mazer Rackham]

Even if Bond 23 is worse than QoS, it will still bring in the huge worldwide numbers. The franchise is too strong to let one film affect it.

Organic fertiliser of bovine origin. TMWTGG almost sank the franchise and so, much as I liked it, did LTK. Luckily, both times they managed to come back with strong follow-ups that rescued Bond (TSWLM and GE respectively), but in order to do that, they first had to realise that change was necessary. Does the current regime have the nous to do that?

I sincerely hope so. I have heard rumours that Craig was very unhappy with the reviews of QoS. Even if Babs & Co. think they are invincible, and bury their heads in the sand, it appears as though right now Craig holds enough power to voice his concerns - and Babs listens to him.

I am hoping he has voiced his concerns loud enough. Judging by the hiring of Morgan, and the attempt to hire Mendes, it is certainly a foot in the right direction.

I was not happy at all with QoS, and one more bad Bond movie is enough to make me wash my hands of the entire franchise.

The rumors are very true, Danny boy was not the least bit happy with his or Quarks reception. Some reason he thought he might get an Oscar nod. I wonder who is giving him those ideas, he was convinced he had in the bag at the BAFTAs a few years back.

Willy, his voice is the problem. With Quark he is front and center making major decisions and he had the same influences in CR's production more than any Bond star or Direct has even been allowed to be. Maybe because like Craig you don't like the Bond movies either you think his voice is the lone voice of sanity between Mikey and Babs. He has fringe interest that do no lend themselves to Bond or action movies.

James Bond has endured over the years and come damned close to disaster. Biggest difference between now and then is Cubby.
I was saving this as part of response to artsy yabbo a few pages back, but here it is for free.

As much as you (Willy) lament DAD, it wasn't the death of the franchise, no where near, it was successful and primed people for the next Brozza adventure. When CR finally comes along it is primed for success, including being released to a much bigger market than was available in 2002, regardless of whoever stared. The tell-tale now is the slow backwards slid. He lost 4 million viewers in the US and an estimated 8 million Foreign. Combined with the fact the audience has not grown overall. Despite the projections

27.8m DAD US
25.4m CR US
23.4m QUARK US

I know people who are projecting a softer Bond 23. And this is dangerous over all for the franchise, seeing as it bucked the recent trends of sequels growing the base further.

[bjmdds]

Let's just say it was for my own sanity!

Don't worry Carl, all will be fine upon her return and you can rest your nerves.

[bjmdds]

Mazer, in your expert opinion, would Hugh Jackman jump start the franchise right now if Craig was replaced by him both domestically and internationally?

[The Sweeney]

27.8m DAD US
25.4m CR US
23.4m QUARK US

I know people who are projecting a softer Bond 23. And this is dangerous over all for the franchise, seeing as it bucked the recent trends of sequels growing the base further.

The States never took to Craig like they did with Brozza, even though he had a bigger opening weekend with QoS.

But Bond has never been about the States alone. It's one franchise which depends more on worldwide sales than what happens in the States. And worldwide sales, did Craig exceed Brozza's films?

[Kristatos]

Mazer, in your expert opinion, would Hugh Jackman jump start the franchise right now if Craig was replaced by him both domestically and internationally?

I'm not an expert, but I don't see Jackman as the huge box office draw you seem to think he is,

[Captain Nash]

Thanks Carl.
Nice to see Pierce has God talking to him. Telling him not to watch Craigs Bond films.
Standard former Bond procedure.
Not the messages from the almighty. Hope he's not about to pull a David Ike.

what Nash just doesn't get,and can never get is Brosnan actually is a class act.Nash is and the rest of his mind numbed troop are quick to defend the angry sullen craggy Craig anything he does.Nash,yes it rhymes with ass, and the others in his demented click praise Brosnan only when he talks well of Craig and still spit in Brosnan's face for not being Jason Bourne Jake Bauer wannabe like the doggy Craig is.We can see how fucked up Nash is by how desperately his demented mind twists around a rather genial polite statement from Brosnan a man who was publicly wronged by the jokers in charge at Eon.

Does your mommy know you're using the computer.
What a strange liitle outburst.
So your opinions are golden, and that's it then?
Kiss my ass kiddo.