Worst Movies That Cracked $1 Billion At Box Office

[Cyke]

Realism and Bond don't go together I'll stick with born or MI for that.

The MI TV show is way more grounded than the movies, and I'm not talking about the multi-million dollar action pieces, but rather on a more fundamental level: the MI team is supposed to be in and out without leaving a trace, using confidence tricks, illusion, misdirection, infiltration, etc. They even had roles like the roper, the con man, the actor, the muscle, etc. Much of the tension comes from them nearly being discovered. In the real world, that's exactly what you'd want a spy agency to do.

The MI movies are fun (imo only 1 and 2 are the weaker films in the series), but much of the action are pieces that would easily make a breaking news report on 24 hr news -- the opposite of what a military would want to do, never mind a spy agency. The movies occasionally do the missions the old TV show style (classic example being the CIA infiltration sequence in the first movie), but for the most part, they still delve into movie fireworks a lot.

The four Soderbergh Ocean's films -- while comedies -- are much closer to the old Mission Impossible style, and are pretty successful in their own right. It'd be really easy to turn that into a spy thriller, and Tom Cruise can still get his laps in.

[Gray Lensman]

Just to add to this, Ian Fleming the writer of Bond was actually a spy during WW2 and lot of thing from the earlier films like the practical gadgets came from his own experiences as well as Bond himself being a mish-mash of other spies he encountered in his time.

However there is a certain amount of sleek and sexy added to Bond (cars, women etc) which when left unchecked turns into the camp silliness of (later) Roger Moore films. Also fun fact in the first film Dr No was originally going to be a monkey, the writer who thought of that was fired for not keeping it realistic.

Many of the characters in the first Bond novels were based heavily on people Fleming had worked with. M, Moneypenny, Vesper Lynd, and Felix Leiter are all based on people (or composites of people) Fleming worked with during the war. Q as a person is solely an invention of the films, in the novels the devices come from Q department, but are given to him by someone else.

[choptop]

Huh? The book series which was incredibly popular was pretty realistic. They maybe had some far fetched coincidences, but the characters were grounded. Some of the best movies “Casino Royale”, From Russia With Love”, “Dr. No”, etc were grounded more in realism. MIT and superspy Bourne are probably less realistic than some of the best Bond stories

For the most part the Bond movies are unrealistic and I think they work better that way sure you have a few realistic good movies but for me the best ones are more fantastic.

[choptop]

The MI TV show is way more grounded than the movies, and I'm not talking about the multi-million dollar action pieces, but rather on a more fundamental level: the MI team is supposed to be in and out without leaving a trace, using confidence tricks, illusion, misdirection, infiltration, etc. They even had roles like the roper, the con man, the actor, the muscle, etc. Much of the tension comes from them nearly being discovered. In the real world, that's exactly what you'd want a spy agency to do.

The MI movies are fun (imo only 1 and 2 are the weaker films in the series), but much of the action are pieces that would easily make a breaking news report on 24 hr news -- the opposite of what a military would want to do, never mind a spy agency. The movies occasionally do the missions the old TV show style (classic example being the CIA infiltration sequence in the first movie), but for the most part, they still delve into movie fireworks a lot.

The four Soderbergh Ocean's films -- while comedies -- are much closer to the old Mission Impossible style, and are pretty successful in their own right. It'd be really easy to turn that into a spy thriller, and Tom Cruise can still get his laps in.

By realism I mean movie realism a real real spy movie would look more like tinker tailor soldier spy.

[Arfguy]

Transformers: Age of Extinction

[TomServofan]

I can't unsee that... that's just awful!

aggh.. those Hobbit films! now, mind you, I thought Martin Freeman was GREAT as Bilbo... I can't complain about McKellen as Gandalf, either. I just wished that they hadn't made it into three films! I was hoping some producer would tell him "you get ONE shot" to tell this story in less than 150 minutes, including the credits. that's it!"

Do you agree the lord of the rings trilogy was lightning in a bottle and you can't strike it twice?

[Midvillian1322]

Do you agree the lord of the rings trilogy was lightning in a bottle and you can't strike it twice?

I personally didnt like any of them. Found them to be boring..but I understand that's not a popular opinion and dont think the movies are bad. Just not for me. I feel asleep watching LoTR 2 in theaters. I was very young maybe I should revisit them as an adult but I cant bring myself to

[Totoro Man]

Do you agree the lord of the rings trilogy was lightning in a bottle and you can't strike it twice?

sort of. I think the bigger problem is that they gave Peter Jackson too much freedom and he became even more self indulgent and excessive.

there was really no reason why "the Hobbit" should have been expanded and turned into three movies! I think that the lightning-in-a-bottle aspect was that earlier the execs, producers, and so on were able to put some limitations on the films; they could say 'no' to every little thing, and stuff like that.

I was actually hoping that del Toro would have handled "the Hobbit" because he's not quite as prone to grandiose overkill and bursting the seams of the narrative.

"the Hobbit" could have been pretty good if they restricted themselves to making just ONE movie.

[Carabas]

there was really no reason why "the Hobbit" should have been expanded and turned into three movies!

People keep saying this, but really, it wasn't expanded by much. There's a ton of epic stuff that happens in "The Hobbit" that the book sort of barely mentions.

If Tolkien had written Lord Of The Rings in the same style he wrote The Hobbit in it would have been 200 pages.

[AJBopp]

sort of. I think the bigger problem is that they gave Peter Jackson too much freedom and he became even more self indulgent and excessive.

there was really no reason why "the Hobbit" should have been expanded and turned into three movies! I think that the lightning-in-a-bottle aspect was that earlier the execs, producers, and so on were able to put some limitations on the films; they could say 'no' to every little thing, and stuff like that.

My understanding is that the opposite is true. Can't remember where I read it but some sort of entertainment outlet had a story many years about Jackson pitching the idea, and he was concerned about how they would react to too expensive a production, so he pitched two LotR movies instead of three. The response was "Why on earth would you not do this in three movies?" Then the execs were all over the idea of another trilogy for The Hobbit.

I find it interesting, though, that there is an argument of not enough control by the studio execs on the Hobbit movies and too much control on many of the DCEU movies.

[AJBopp]

People keep saying this, but really, it wasn't expanded by much. There's a ton of epic stuff that happens in "The Hobbit" that the book sort of barely mention

But including that stuff in the movie expands it by a great deal. There were also several storylines that were unique to the movie trilogy. There were a few in LotR too, but not as many.

[Powerboy]

My understanding is that the opposite is true. Can't remember where I read it but some sort of entertainment outlet had a story many years about Jackson pitching the idea, and he was concerned about how they would react to too expensive a production, so he pitched two LotR movies instead of three. The response was "Why on earth would you not do this in three movies?" Then the execs were all over the idea of another trilogy for The Hobbit.

I find it interesting, though, that there is an argument of not enough control by the studio execs on the Hobbit movies and too much control on many of the DCEU movies.

That's what I heard too, that Jackson was afraid the studio would balk at the expense but suggested that two movies were needed to do the story at all and the studio guy wanted a trilogy. With the Hobbit, I think the studio just wanted to repeat their success so expanded it into a trilogy.

[Totoro Man]

ah, well, then I'm totally wrong about the Hobbit films behind-the-scenes stuff then... I still don't think it should have been three films, though! some of that stuff could have been cut out in my opinion.

I just found the films to be wearisomely long and over-stuffed. maybe if it had been reformatted as 'prestige television' I wouldn't have found it so tiresome. I gave up after the second film.

too much exec control on DCEU films? wow, okay. pretty sure I never made that argument, but I think it HAS been made on CBR by other people.

I just don't think Snyder and Goyer were a good match for Superman... at a conceptual level. it would be like asking John Hughes to take over the "Saw" franchise... not a good fit. just because you like something doesn't mean that you'd be a great match for handling the material. John Woo, for example, loves musicals. he's even said in interviews that he's always wanted to direct one: but he wouldn't be a great match for doing a remake of "Singing in the Rain". (I also don't think he would try to do it, either)

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I probably would have made the Hobbit too films. It was big enough to do that comfortably. Some **** was just bloated.

[Carabas]

too much exec control on DCEU films? wow, okay. pretty sure I never made that argument, but I think it HAS been made on CBR by other people.

Well, an odd mixture of too much and too little.
They let the directors run loose and make 4+ hour movies and then the studio steps in and makes them cut half of it out (or has the company that made the trailer do it for them). No wonder they're messes.