Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
November 18, 2008
Scott Lumley: Drop Judi Dench? Are you kidding? If there's an actor or actress more perfectly suited for that role than Dame Judi Dench I don't know who it would be.
Sean Collier: Damn right, Scott. I will have no sullying of the good name of Dame Judi.
Tim brings up the big point of comparison, I think - The Dark Knight. (Hah! I found a way to talk about it more!) The Batman franchise was completely redesigned by Batman Begins, and it led to critical praise and copious word-of-mouth - both about that film and where they would go next. Where they went next was, of course, the biggest opening of all time. The same is true of Casino Royale. That film threw out the Bond playbook, taking a stale franchise and making it fresh and modern. Just like Batman Begins, people started talking and anticipating. The title and the marketing were almost irrelevant with all that buzz - they could've called it James Bond's Wonder Emporium and still made almost $70 million.
Kim Hollis: I mentioned it when I did the forecast and I'll mention it again here. I would definitely compare this to the Bourne films and their increases as the series gained more and more fans. Casino Royale gave James Bond the chance to reach an entirely new audience thanks to the fact that it's really creating a Bond universe and world that didn't quite exist previously due to all of the individual Bond films standing on their own and the numerous recastings. Casino Royale was so good that it was able to build a new, engaged audience that previously might have found earlier Bonds to be too far over-the-top or even past their prime. Quantum of Solace definitely benefited from this.
Kevin Chen: While Quantum of Solace benefited from the recreation of the Bond universe provided by Casino Royale, the jury is out on whether the sequel built upon it. If I had to take a stab at the opening for James Bond will return in _______, I'd say it doesn't match this movie's level of success.
Jamie Ruccio: Having seen enough crappy Bond films, I took a wait and see attitude with Casino Royale. There was no way I was going to spend money on it to see it in the theaters. I waited for it to hit DVD and then saw it. I recognized it for what it was, a reimagining of the entire atmosphere and environment of James Bond through the lens of Jason Bourne. This was fine with me as I very much liked Casino Royale and considered it a much more faithful telling of the Jason...err...James Bond I knew from one of the early books. The weekend gross somewhat surprises me but not entirely.
Max Braden: The edgy action we've come to expect after the Bourne and Batman series as everyone has mentioned is the likely reason. I think Kim has it right too, where the bulk of the audience is now a new generation who may not have even read the books or seen any Bonds earlier than Brosnan. The old guard like me who think Craig isn't right for the role don't seem to have held him back. Frankly I was disappointed in Casino Royale (both because of Craig and because of the pace) and thought that audiences weren't going to be that interested in this sequel, so I'm really surprised by the opening figure.
Jason Lee: The opening weekend for QOS is about $10 mil more than I was expecting - a turn of events that I'm definitely pleased with. Overall, I believe that the film benefited from two major points:
1. A renewed sense of excitement around the franchise due to the brilliant Casino Royale (a point that's been reiterated in this discussion already)
2. An overall movement in the film industry towards more realistic, relevant stories as opposed to kitschy, somewhat cheesy films. Bond benefits from capitalizing on this, as did Dark Knight, Iron Man and even Star Wars Episode III to a certain extent (with its focus on a Bush-like dictator that acts unilaterally without regard to the interests of the larger world community).
Big question: Will next summer's Star Trek benefit as well?
Continued:
1
2
3
4
5
6
|
|
|
|