The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[Kristatos]

Spiderman is doing this with mediocre reviews too.

Some films are critic-proof.

[Captain Nash]

CR cost $150 million to make, another $120 million to promote and distribute. Spiderman 3 cost $258 million just to make, plus promotions. CR took in $40 million it's first weekend in the USA. Spiderman 3 just hauled in $59 million in it's first day in the USA! It did $104 million worldwide, day one, both records!

And?
What competition does Spiderman have?
This is the third Spiderman film too. If you are comparing it to CR, then surely you'll have to wait for Bond 23.

[bjmdds]

CR cost $150 million to make, another $120 million to promote and distribute. Spiderman 3 cost $258 million just to make, plus promotions. CR took in $40 million it's first weekend in the USA. Spiderman 3 just hauled in $59 million in it's first day in the USA! It did $104 million worldwide, day one, both records!

And?
What competition does Spiderman have?
This is the third Spiderman film too. If you are comparing it to CR, then surely you'll have to wait for Bond 23.

You are not suggesting Craig's second film would approach Spiderman 2's numbers, or even that Bond 23 would approach Spiderman 3's numbers? Spiderman 1 outdid CR by a mile, as a novice film.

[bjmdds]

CR cost $150 million to make, another $120 million to promote and distribute. Spiderman 3 cost $258 million just to make, plus promotions. CR took in $40 million it's first weekend in the USA. Spiderman 3 just hauled in $59 million in it's first day in the USA! It did $104 million worldwide, day one, both records!

Spiderman is doing this with mediocre reviews too. Saw the new Jason Bourne trailer today. Looks good.

Will you see it this August and do you feel it will top Bourne 2's numbers?

[stockslivevan]

CR cost $150 million to make, another $120 million to promote and distribute. Spiderman 3 cost $258 million just to make, plus promotions. CR took in $40 million it's first weekend in the USA. Spiderman 3 just hauled in $59 million in it's first day in the USA! It did $104 million worldwide, day one, both records!

Doesn't make Spider-Man 3 better, it still dissapoints and the reviews from critics AND FANS have shown that.

I think Spider-Man 3 box office will be just like X-Men 3. Big opening but once bad word of mouth flooded it dropped. I'm sure Pirates 3 will reclaim the d**n records anyway since those teenage girls can't get enough of them.

[Captain Nash]

CR cost $150 million to make, another $120 million to promote and distribute. Spiderman 3 cost $258 million just to make, plus promotions. CR took in $40 million it's first weekend in the USA. Spiderman 3 just hauled in $59 million in it's first day in the USA! It did $104 million worldwide, day one, both records!

And?
What competition does Spiderman have?
This is the third Spiderman film too. If you are comparing it to CR, then surely you'll have to wait for Bond 23.

You are not suggesting Craig's second film would appraoch Spiderman 2's numbers, or even that Bond 23 would approach Spiderman 3's numbers? Spiderman 1 outdid CR by a mile, as a novice film.

No, I was asking if you were comparing it to the Spiderman franchise. And you seem to have not answered that question. I was saying if you're going to compare them, then you'll have to wait for Bond 23, when Craig is even more established in the role.
But at the end of the day CR has broken all the records, and leave the inflation adjusted films out of it. Check out this list.http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/
CR # 32
DAD # 74
To compare Craigs first Bond film to the 3rd Spiderman film is completely pointless and I wonder why you're even bothering myself. No doubt you'll find alot of support around here ready to back up these whimsical claims.

[bjmdds]

Nash, you cannot even compare CR to Spiderman 1, in terms of worldwide success either, from your own chart. The point is that it seems Spiderman has achieved that which very few action films ever could, and I find it a remarkable accomplishment. CR was successful at the box office. We await Craig's second film for comparison.

[Captain Nash]

That's quite true.
But I don't class films like Spiderman or Batman in the same catergory as Bond.
Bond is unique, Spiderman is a comic book hero, who with a well made film will put bums on seats or like The Hulk, fail!
And I'm not comparing Spidey #1 to CR, but if you want to pit Spidey against Bond then CR is the best Bond has got.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

The problem with the other forum sites has been whenever a member with contrary views to either Craig or CR has posted their opinions, they are immediately attacked, like a swarm of bees, ridiculed, mocked, cursed at, defamed, and belittled by the masses of pro-Craig/CR members.

That's true. The other forums were anti-Craig in the months leading up to autumn 2005. Then lots of people left the forums/were banned; then many people wanted to get behind Daniel Craig (including many people who were opposed to his casting) and attacked any dissent, malinly because they feel they have to support Bond, and because they wanted to carry on posting.

This has made the other Bond forums rather tedious. If they had not cast Craig, the bitter arguments would not have occured.

[The Sweeney]

The other forums were anti-Craig in the months leading up to autumn 2005. Then lots of people left the forums/were banned; then many people wanted to get behind Daniel Craig (including many people who were opposed to his casting) and attacked any dissent, malinly because they feel they have to support Bond, and because they wanted to carry on posting.

Many of the opposing fans were allowed to remain on Bond forums for quite some time (on the 3 that I witnessed - MI6, AJB and CBn), but only got banned if their arguments became petty, silly, offensive, rude, childish, tantrum-throwing, etc. They also brought nothing new to a debate. It usually stopped with `I hate him, he's ugly, he has blonde hair'. If this is repeated enough times, then I don't blame moderators for banning these people.

I also saw quite a few Craig fans who were banned too for the exact same reason, starting flame wars and adding fuel to the fire (I guess even I was borderline at some stage).

This has made the other Bond forums rather tedious. If they had not cast Craig, the bitter arguments would not have occured.

True, but I think any new actor would have brought serious arguments to the fray, not just Craig. It seems you can't please every Bond fan, no matter what.

[bjmdds]

The other forums were anti-Craig in the months leading up to autumn 2005. Then lots of people left the forums/were banned; then many people wanted to get behind Daniel Craig (including many people who were opposed to his casting) and attacked any dissent, malinly because they feel they have to support Bond, and because they wanted to carry on posting.

Many of the opposing fans were allowed to remain on Bond forums for quite some time (on the 3 that I witnessed - MI6, AJB and CBn), but only got banned if their arguments became petty, silly, offensive, rude, childish, tantrum-throwing, etc. They also brought nothing new to a debate. It usually stopped with `I hate him, he's ugly, he has blonde hair'. If this is repeated enough times, then I don't blame moderators for banning these people.

I also saw quite a few Craig fans who were banned too for the exact same reason, starting flame wars and adding fuel to the fire (I guess even I was borderline at some stage).

This has made the other Bond forums rather tedious. If they had not cast Craig, the bitter arguments would not have occured.

True, but I think any new actor would have brought serious arguments to the fray, not just Craig. It seems you can't please every Bond fan, no matter what.

You have to admit Craig caused more polarization in the Bond ranks than a host of other actors would have Sweeney, be it Jackman,Owen,Butler, etc.

[bjmdds]

That's quite true.
But I don't class films like Spiderman or Batman in the same catergory as Bond.
Bond is unique, Spiderman is a comic book hero, who with a well made film will put bums on seats or like The Hulk, fail!
And I'm not comparing Spidey #1 to CR, but if you want to pit Spidey against Bond then CR is the best Bond has got.

Spiderman 3 set the all time weekend opening record in the USA, $148 million! There have been other comic book hero films that have underperformed, be it Hulk, Superman Returns, even Batman Begins. There is something dynamic about this Spiderman franchise and it might never be seen again, be it The Dark Knight, Iron Man, even Indy 4, all in 2008. Bond films will never achieve these kind of numbers in the 21st century,but neither would Spiderman last 40 years with 21 films.

[bjmdds]

The problem with the other forum sites has been whenever a member with contrary views to either Craig or CR has posted their opinions, they are immediately attacked, like a swarm of bees, ridiculed, mocked, cursed at, defamed, and belittled by the masses of pro-Craig/CR members.

That's true. The other forums were anti-Craig in the months leading up to autumn 2005. Then lots of people left the forums/were banned; then many people wanted to get behind Daniel Craig (including many people who were opposed to his casting) and attacked any dissent, malinly because they feel they have to support Bond, and because they wanted to carry on posting.

This has made the other Bond forums rather tedious. If they had not cast Craig, the bitter arguments would not have occured.

Most OTHER forums are 95% pro-Craig and each has their selected pitbull attack dogs to go after contrary views, be it MI6 or CB.net. It is nice to just have open and friendly discussions with people who are cordial and respect all opinions on Eon's direction with the Bond franchise.

[The Sweeney]

It is nice to just have open and friendly discussions with people who are cordial and respect all opinions on Eon's direction with the Bond franchise.

You mean respect all opinions except the new direction, and new Bond.....

[Skywalker]

You have to admit Craig caused more polarization in the Bond ranks than a host of other actors would have Sweeney, be it Jackman,Owen,Butler, etc.

Never thought of using the word 'Polarization' when referring to Bond.

I do agree BJ that the appointment of Craig has been more controversial than the selection of other names would have been.

[The Sweeney]

You have to admit Craig caused more polarization in the Bond ranks than a host of other actors would have Sweeney, be it Jackman,Owen,Butler, etc.

Never thought of using the word 'Polarization' when referring to Bond.

I do agree BJ that the appointment of Craig has been more controversial than the selection of other names would have been.

I agree too....but right now it looks like EON have had the last laugh with their controversial choice - for now!

[Skywalker]

I agree too....but right now it looks like EON have had the last laugh with their controversial choice - for now!

There's no doubting EON are basking in the BO takings and general appeal of Craig as Bond.

[bjmdds]

It is nice to just have open and friendly discussions with people who are cordial and respect all opinions on Eon's direction with the Bond franchise.

You mean respect all opinions except the new direction, and new Bond.....

To question the new direction is debate of open mind. Disagreeing with Eon has nothing to do with respecting people's various opinions Sweeney.

[bjmdds]

You have to admit Craig caused more polarization in the Bond ranks than a host of other actors would have Sweeney, be it Jackman,Owen,Butler, etc.

Never thought of using the word 'Polarization' when referring to Bond.

I do agree BJ that the appointment of Craig has been more controversial than the selection of other names would have been.

There seems to be little, if any, middle ground with Craig. It's either love him or hate him, for the most part, as Bond. Sweeney believes that Bond 22 will outdo CR, if I remember correctly, right Sweeney? That my friend, will be a major hill to climb, to surpass $600 million AND be critically acclaimed as well. Eight months until filming begins and more of the new script revealed for discussion.

[ID]

Most OTHER forums are 95% pro-Craig and each has their selected pitbull attack dogs to go after contrary views, be it MI6 or CB.net. It is nice to just have open and friendly discussions with people who are cordial and respect all opinions on Eon's direction with the Bond franchise.

This forum is probably the most democratic out of the Bond forums now. Those alienated by Daniel Craig can openly have their say and posters like The Sweeney have been allowed to become major characters on the site and present an opposite view.