quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
So $56M for the weekend, I was going to call 60M earlier based on Friday's numbers. It is most likely going to be the lowest grossing Craig 'Bond' film domestically. International numbers are pretty strong for a first week.

Yes I didn't think it would do the really big numbers in the US either, but would play a lot better internationally. We still have COVID restrictions and the movie is too long for a lot of attention spans, but I also think its a bit of a matter of cultural attitude and what kind of Bond fan you are.

Bond was escapist fun for me. My favorite Bond films starred Moore, but I liked Brosnan better as the character. I tried to tolerate Daniel Craig, since it was the producers decision to go for the realistic spy with interconnected storylines, in between action scenes of incredible fantasy of course. But Craig played Bond as though he was Hamlet. After seeing him balling all over the red carpet at the UK premiere, audiences should have realized what No Time To Die meant.

By having the word out for a week before the US premiere, I do think it effected the box office for some. You have to really want to enjoy a movie to go see it in the theatres right now and the Craig era Bond has never exactly been enjoyable. It would have been better if he made his exit with the ending of Spectre.

Only than he wouldn't have been Hamlet.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

Bond was escapist fun for me. My favorite Bond films starred Moore, but I liked Brosnan better as the character. I tried to tolerate Daniel Craig, since it was the producers decision to go for the realistic spy with interconnected storylines, in between action scenes of incredible fantasy of course. But Craig played Bond as though he was Hamlet. After seeing him balling all over the red carpet at the UK premiere, audiences should have realized what No Time To Die meant.

You have to really want to enjoy a movie to go see it in the theatres right now and the Craig era Bond has never exactly been enjoyable. It would have been better if he made his exit with the ending of Spectre.

Only than he wouldn't have been Hamlet.

I like Craig as the Bond character, I think by the time Die Another Day was released the "escapist or campy fun" meter was pegged hard. If they were going to continue in that mode I am sure Brosnan would have ended up doing a couple more.

I enjoyed the first 3 Craig films while the last two suffered from lackluster bad guys and no Judi Dench. No Time to Die just went into full on identity crisis meltdown. The opening scene needed an opening scene...which we didn't get. The actual age difference between Malek and Seydoux presented a problem but I did like the new 007 actress and thought she held her own.

I think the two biggest problems with the Bond title are the concept was born in the cold war era with cold war ideology also after 25 films it is having problems being fresh and original. I think that is where Craig added a nice change of pace but it just wasn't meant to last.

As it stands I have little interest in following Bond beyond 25. If it goes in just about any direction No Time to Die leaves the audience to speculate then I can say I am officially out. Still, if the cards keep coming I will always keep an eye on the autograph releases.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mykdude,

Saw the film although It had lots of bits that where unoriginal and boring the film ran well and at no point was I thinking when is this going to end, worth seeing

quote:

Originally posted by wuher:
Saw the film although It had lots of bits that where unoriginal and boring the film ran well and at no point was I thinking when is this going to end, worth seeing

I didn't hate it either, nor did I feel bored. It just threw so much at you and most of it fell short in completing what it started. Personally I would have thrown out some things or filled it with more action and made it into two movies.

Halloween Kills is projected to hit between $45 and $50 million this weekend. Bounce that off a $20M budget (seems low) and it is a hit already.

"No Time to Die" is about to hit 100 M domestically this week, making it the 8th highest grossing film of the year so far in the U.S.

Worldwide, it's up to about 450 M, and it is about to be the fifth highest grossing movie of 2021.

Much less than the 880 M that "Spectre" grossed.

The Last Duel is probably a really good movie but you have to laugh at the contrast between all of that talent finishing 5th over Halloween Kills 1st place smash and grab.

I think Venom may break the $200M barrier domestic.

International numbers for Bond this weekend still have not come in yet.....should blow past half a billion worldwide.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
The Last Duel is probably a really good movie but you have to laugh at the contrast between all of that talent finishing 5th over Halloween Kills 1st place smash and grab.

Actually its my understanding that the The Last Duel is a really bad movie, which you can kind of get. For one thing, nobody today is very likely to care about the last sanctioned trial by combat duel in 14th century France. However, if you do, you can look it up and find out which Knight won.

For another thing, this was written by Damon and Affleck, two guys from Boston. How much could they know about 14th century France and wouldn't they look pretty silly there. See the trailer to answer that question and they do.

Lastly, name the last good movie Matt Damon and/or Ben Affleck made. Can't think of any? It won't be The Last Duel either.

Critics are 87% Fresh.....not that it means anything. Either way I will catch it not in the theater.

After a long delay, Dune opens this weekend in theatres and streaming on HBO Max. I had my doubts about how good any movie could be trying to nail down the source material, since I have found previous versions badly flawed.

What I didn't know and what probably should have been said is that this Dune is Part 1. It doesn't call itself Part 1, but it ends mid-story.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, since you can't cram this story into even its 2 1/2 hours running time, but viewers should be forewarned that the curtains just drop here.

I have two friends who are really into "Dune," the whole collection of stories. They hated that movie that came out years ago and they had all kinds of detailed criticism. They allowed that it would be impossible to film so it couldn't be done right anyway as what was once said about "Lord of the Rings." I have heard that this movie is going to satisfy many "Dune" fans to some extent.

I didn't read the book nor any of the others.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
After a long delay, Dune opens this weekend in theatres and streaming on HBO Max. I had my doubts about how good any movie could be trying to nail down the source material, since I have found previous versions badly flawed.

What I didn't know and what probably should have been said is that this Dune is Part 1. It doesn't call itself Part 1, but it ends mid-story.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, since you can't cram this story into even its 2 1/2 hours running time, but viewers should be forewarned that the curtains just drop here.

Re: Dune.

Didn't they just do a made for cable movie (or mini series) of this just 5 to 10 years ago ?

Correction: It was in 2000. Rittenhouse even did a card set of it. Seems like it wasn't that long ago.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Re: Dune.

Didn't they just do a made for cable movie (or mini series) of this just 5 to 10 years ago ?

Correction: It was in 2000. Rittenhouse even did a card set of it. Seems like it wasn't that long ago.

Yes, they did. It was a whole lot better than the film version, mainly because they had much more time to tell the story. It was quite well received at the time, so much so that they then made 'Children of Dune' which came out in 2003. That wasn't so good though

The TV version attracted my interest because the company doing the CG SFX used software that I was using at the time, Newtek's Lightwave 3D.

"No Time to Die" is only about 15 M away from being the # 2 film of the year, worldwide, behind Fast and Furious 9.

Caveat- it would be the # 2 film of the year produced by a Hollywood studio. There are still 3 Chinese films ahead of it, which most folks have never heard of (including me).

Just got back from seeing Dune. It is certainly more coherent than the David Lynch version.

The story is fine and the film looks awesome. Unfortunately the stoic characters really does drag things out. Many of the science fiction books from the 60's and earlier had great ideas but not so much with likable characters. This seems to plague all of the attempts to bring Dune to the screen.

My take on the latest version of Frank Herbert's book: Dune, the film that makes Foundation seem like a fast moving, action packed TV adventure series

Dune reviews are praising the cinematic look of the film, saying its faithful to Frank Herbert's novel and then that its boring as dirt.

I guess that's what's been said here too. Well did anyone see The Martian or Ad Astra? Also Si-Fi movies that were praised by critics, when watching paint dry was more enjoyable than trying to get to the end of those snoozers.

To be fair, this Dune ends in the middle and too much attention may be on too many serious actors trying to establish a serious set up, while also trying to promote current "woke" concepts that may mirror some of Herbert's ideas. In other words, the writers, producers and director treated the thing like Gospel when the audience wants more action and less posing.

I wonder if the second half has already been filmed or if they are waiting to see how well this one does?

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Dune reviews are praising the cinematic look of the film, saying its faithful to Frank Herbert's novel and then that its boring as dirt.

The cinematography was good and the CG was excellent. Unfortunately, that did not make the film look that great. Impossibly huge ships coming in to land between row after row of ants...er human soldiers might look quite impressive the first time but the tenth or twelvth..not so much The cute little mouse thing with the big ears was a nice change though

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I guess that's what's been said here too. Well did anyone see The Martian or Ad Astra? Also Si-Fi movies that were praised by critics, when watching paint dry was more enjoyable than trying to get to the end of those snoozers.

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed watching the Martian, but then I was quite busy spotting the CG that was being used more often than a lot of people realised. Ad Astra I've watched but can't remember anything about which probably says everything

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
To be fair, this Dune ends in the middle and too much attention may be on too many serious actors trying to establish a serious set up, while also trying to promote current "woke" concepts that may mirror some of Herbert's ideas. In other words, the writers, producers and director treated the thing like Gospel when the audience wants more action and less posing.

One problem I had was that most of the actors came across as reading their scripts, not acting. Oh, and Jason Momoa just being his usual self Actors can bring a boring scene to life if they put the words they are asked to speak across the right way. That's the secret of good acting.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I wonder if the second half has already been filmed or if they are waiting to see how well this one does?

Not too sure, but if they edit together all the scenes that Zendaya appears in that would be a pretty good trailer for part 2. They were all glimpses into the future afterall

One thing I suspect that might happen is that after the high viewing figures for this weeks initial release, they will fall through the floor next week once 'real' reports of the film have circulated.

I think that hits on the problem. Both the Martian and Ad Astra were somewhat the same type of story but Matt Damon made his movie watchable. Sorry Brad.

I was going to mention about Dune that for a movie this big, when Jason Momoa is basically your one and only great character....your movie is in trouble.

From what I have read part 2 has not be green lit.

I guess you catch wind of what is being called woke these days but nothing I found to invoke any sort of reaction. It's a political/social book disguised as science fiction. As with many of the titles from that period you have to push forward the scifi and water down the polisci for it to work on the larger audience.

I did finally watch Jungle Cruise. Wow! What a mess!

Sadly, it actually starts out like it might be an enjoyable movie.