41 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.

And doesn't that chime with statements from the likes of Campbell, Purvis and Wade re: the content and tone of CR? I guess all the recent talk of a (very) young Bond (the 22-year-old Henry Cavill, etc.) may have taken our eyes off this particular ball, but could we be in for an era of Bondage that makes the Dalton chapter look like Moore at his most jokey?

[hrabb04]

My big fear is that there will be 2 soundtracks to Casino Royale. One score-related, released a year after the film comes out, the other a songs from and inspired by album with a list of top 40 artists performing songs you have to strain to remember if they were in the film or not.
I fear Sony, EON, et al, are going after the MTV crowd with this one. The classic Bond fans are passe'. We are not their desired demographic. Considering the brains behind this operation, my hopes could not be any lower.

[DLibrasnow]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

The question is - does Sony have the clout to impose anything on EON. After all EON/Danjaq have owned the Bond franchise outright since the 1990s when the Broccoli's got MGM's 50-percent share.

[Righty007]

I doubt Spider-Man will have a cameo in Casino Royale.

[Pussycat]

I doubt Spider-Man will have a cameo in Casino Royale.

From that article on the flops recently attributed to Sony's property, I'm hoping they will look at the signs in front of them and allow EON to make the good BOND flick I know they could make.

Let's see....Stealth is taking a huge nosedive and the reviews aren't good. It had what?? oh yeah...CGI CGI CGI and blow-everything-up!

Spiderman had... CGI of course...but character and story and actors who could act.

I hope they can read the signs.

[tdalton]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.

If the Sony wanting Daniel Craig and Matthew Vaughn for Casino Royale story is true, then I would be all for Sony putting their "stamp" on the Bond franchise, because that's the only way, at this point, that I could see the Bond series even begin to remotely head back in the direction Dalton was trying to take it. None of the other candidates, except for perhaps Clive Owen, seem like they would be able to play that serious a James Bond anywhere near as well as Daniel Craig.

[Spoon]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

I definitely think they will try to put their own stamp on it. I think it's almost inevitable that when something falls into the hands of new ownership, they will try to make their own. They will want to "brand it as a Sony product," and other marketing-speak. Can't do that by leaving it completely alone.

However... what will that stamp be? THAT is an extremely interesting question.

If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.

And that certainly would make sense. BUT, do you remember this old LA Times article? It said:

The prospective new owners, according to sources familiar with Sony's thinking, hope to broaden Bond's appeal beyond older males enamored with the fiery explosions, careening Aston Martins and buxom models. They're aiming for the kind of global audiences that flocked to Sony's Spider-Man blockbusters, believing there should be more to Bond's character than machismo.

Which would seem to be incompatible with Craig/Vaughn and the gritty approach.

Now with respect to Danjaq, this same article said both:

Many a studio executive has been shaken and stirred when pitted against Agent 007's off-camera bodyguards. Shielding Bond from the minefields of Hollywood pitches are producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, her half brother... "Every decision they make starts with the question: 'Is this in the tradition of Bond? Is this the right thing for the franchise?' " MGM Vice Chairman Chris McGurk said. "They know Bond better than anyone else."  No creative decision is made without the blessing of Broccoli's daughter, Barbara, 44, and stepson Wilson, 62... Speaking about her father for a documentary included in the Diamonds Are Forever DVD, Barbara Broccoli said: "I remember one time he said to me, 'You know, the most important thing is don't let 'em screw it up.'"

... which all suggests that Danjaq is inclined to play it business as usual, and would thus veto an attempt to move it in a "Spider-Man", younger direction. But THE SAME ARTICLE says:

The producers nixed actor Pierce Brosnan even though the four films in which he starred were the highest-grossing of the 20-film series. Broccoli and Wilson have let Hollywood agents know they want to replace the 51-year-old Brosnan with a Bond who is 28 to 32 years old.

... which of course DOES suggest Danjaq endorses the younger direction!

My point? It is EXTREMELY unclear right now what vision EITHER Sony or Danjaq has for the direction of Bond. For every bit of evidence pointing one way, there is another pointing the complete opposite.

Edited by Spoon, 02 August 2005 - 06:46 PM.

[Seannery]

[quote name='Spoon' date='2 August 2005 - 19:44'][quote]Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?[/quote]I definitely think they will try to put their own stamp on it. I think it's almost inevitable that when something falls into the hands of new ownership, they will try to make their own. They will want to "brand it as a Sony product," and other marketing-speak. Can't do that by leaving it completely alone.

However... what will that stamp be? THAT is an extremely interesting question.

[quote]If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.[/quote]And that certainly would make sense. BUT, do you remember this old LA Times article? It said:

[quote]The prospective new owners, according to sources familiar with Sony's thinking, hope to broaden Bond's appeal beyond older males enamored with the fiery explosions, careening Aston Martins and buxom models. They're aiming for the kind of global audiences that flocked to Sony's Spider-Man blockbusters, believing there should be more to Bond's character than machismo.[/quote]Which would seem to be incompatible with Craig/Vaughn and the gritty approach.

Now with respect to Danjaq, this same article said both:

[quote]Many a studio executive has been shaken and stirred when pitted against Agent 007's off-camera bodyguards. Shielding Bond from the minefields of Hollywood pitches are producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, her half brother... "Every decision they make starts with the question: 'Is this in the tradition of Bond? Is this the right thing for the franchise?' " MGM Vice Chairman Chris McGurk said. "They know Bond better than anyone else."

[Atticus17F]

[quote name='Seannery' date='2 August 2005 - 18:51'][quote name='Spoon' date='2 August 2005 - 19:44'][quote]Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?[/quote]I definitely think they will try to put their own stamp on it. I think it's almost inevitable that when something falls into the hands of new ownership, they will try to make their own. They will want to "brand it as a Sony product," and other marketing-speak. Can't do that by leaving it completely alone.

However... what will that stamp be? THAT is an extremely interesting question.

[quote]If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.[/quote]And that certainly would make sense. BUT, do you remember this old LA Times article? It said:

[quote]The prospective new owners, according to sources familiar with Sony's thinking, hope to broaden Bond's appeal beyond older males enamored with the fiery explosions, careening Aston Martins and buxom models. They're aiming for the kind of global audiences that flocked to Sony's Spider-Man blockbusters, believing there should be more to Bond's character than machismo.[/quote]Which would seem to be incompatible with Craig/Vaughn and the gritty approach.

Now with respect to Danjaq, this same article said both:

[quote]Many a studio executive has been shaken and stirred when pitted against Agent 007's off-camera bodyguards. Shielding Bond from the minefields of Hollywood pitches are producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, her half brother... "Every decision they make starts with the question: 'Is this in the tradition of Bond? Is this the right thing for the franchise?' " MGM Vice Chairman Chris McGurk said. "They know Bond better than anyone else."

[Seannery]

[quote name='Atticus17F' date='2 August 2005 - 20:01'][quote name='Seannery' date='2 August 2005 - 18:51'][quote name='Spoon' date='2 August 2005 - 19:44'][quote]Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?[/quote]I definitely think they will try to put their own stamp on it. I think it's almost inevitable that when something falls into the hands of new ownership, they will try to make their own. They will want to "brand it as a Sony product," and other marketing-speak. Can't do that by leaving it completely alone.

However... what will that stamp be? THAT is an extremely interesting question.

[quote]If it's true that Sony wanted Daniel Craig for Bond and Matthew Vaughn to direct, it suggests to me that the company is up for some serious risk-taking, and willing to see the series relaunched in an extremely "gritty" and "realistic" direction.[/quote]And that certainly would make sense. BUT, do you remember this old LA Times article? It said:

[quote]The prospective new owners, according to sources familiar with Sony's thinking, hope to broaden Bond's appeal beyond older males enamored with the fiery explosions, careening Aston Martins and buxom models. They're aiming for the kind of global audiences that flocked to Sony's Spider-Man blockbusters, believing there should be more to Bond's character than machismo.[/quote]Which would seem to be incompatible with Craig/Vaughn and the gritty approach.

Now with respect to Danjaq, this same article said both:

[quote]Many a studio executive has been shaken and stirred when pitted against Agent 007's off-camera bodyguards. Shielding Bond from the minefields of Hollywood pitches are producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, her half brother... "Every decision they make starts with the question: 'Is this in the tradition of Bond? Is this the right thing for the franchise?' " MGM Vice Chairman Chris McGurk said. "They know Bond better than anyone else."

[hcmv007]

I am really getting irritated with Eon on this. I know Campbell is putting the finishing touches on Zorro, but at least give us a clue when we know:

1) First Day of Shooting

2) Release Date of Casino Royale

3) Who is Bond #6?


Speculatuion about all of those questions are running rampant, the studio doesn't even know what to do, to me that is just being lazy and irresponsible on their part. Sounds like to me, Sir Sean is wise to want to retire from movie making, who can blame him? I, as a Bond fan am fed up with it. I do not want to see a Bond movie that imitates the Bourne movies, those movies are good, but Bond is different. A rival production looks SO good now.

[DLibrasnow]

to me that is just being lazy and irresponsible on their part.

Explain to me why you think ite irresponsible on their part? I'm at a loss to understand your logic on this.

EON doesn't owe the fan community anything, they are not making the movies for the fans, but for the general movie going public. As well they should!

And, the general public has a lot more on their minds than who will be the next James Bond.

[Loomis]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

The question is - does Sony have the clout to impose anything on EON. After all EON/Danjaq have owned the Bond franchise outright since the 1990s when the Broccoli's got MGM's 50-percent share.

Well, I hope Sony will put its own stamp on CASINO ROYALE - can't be worse than the stamp that Eon's been stamping on the series over the past few years.

[k13oharts]

Sony has been wanting to do a Bond series of their own ever since McClory approached them. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Now, that they have MGM under them. They have their dream come true.
Point is, how much did information about Bond did McClory give them?
Sony can now add what McClory gave them right?

Some things are for the best..
Let's wait and see what Sony can deliver.

One other thing left pending is Warhead 2000 which Sony was supposed to deliver.
Will Sony get to work on this project or a variation?
Will Sony's past alternative-Bond archives be open to EON?

[hcmv007]

to me that is just being lazy and irresponsible on their part.

Explain to me why you think ite irresponsible on their part? I'm at a loss to understand your logic on this.

EON doesn't owe the fan community anything, they are not making the movies for the fans, but for the general movie going public. As well they should!

And, the general public has a lot more on their minds than who will be the next James Bond.

Okay, so we know at least where shooting will take place, the cars, etc. But I deem Eon irresponsible in the fact that there has been no announcement of an official start date for shooting and no release date for CR whenever it's finished. As far as casting, I won't get into using vicious language, but since actors start projeccts so far in advance, you have to get them before you can't use them (Clive Owen for example). Campbell will probably not direct the next Bond film after this, so the producers should have cast Bond already. The script is finished, unless they are just rewriting some scenes. Location shoots for things like buildings and mountains should be taking place now.

Now for the second paragraph, I agree, but I never said EOn owes me anything. I was venting MY frustration as a fan, not for every Bond fan in general. Different strokes, for different folks.

Yes, I know the world does not revolve around whomever gets the role of 007. A lot more important things are going on. Hope that clears it up for you DLibrasnow. I apologize for not being clearer earlier.

[bryonalston]

to me that is just being lazy and irresponsible on their part.

Explain to me why you think ite irresponsible on their part? I'm at a loss to understand your logic on this.

EON doesn't owe the fan community anything, they are not making the movies for the fans, but for the general movie going public. As well they should!

And, the general public has a lot more on their minds than who will be the next James Bond.

Okay, so we know at least where shooting will take place, the cars, etc. But I deem Eon irresponsible in the fact that there has been no announcement of an official start date for shooting and no release date for CR whenever it's finished. As far as casting, I won't get into using vicious language, but since actors start projeccts so far in advance, you have to get them before you can't use them (Clive Owen for example). Campbell will probably not direct the next Bond film after this, so the producers should have cast Bond already. The script is finished, unless they are just rewriting some scenes. Location shoots for things like buildings and mountains should be taking place now.

Now for the second paragraph, I agree, but I never said EOn owes me anything. I was venting MY frustration as a fan, not for every Bond fan in general. Different strokes, for different folks.

Yes, I know the world does not revolve around whomever gets the role of 007. A lot more important things are going on. Hope that clears it up for you DLibrasnow. I apologize for not being clearer earlier.

I got this off of Wikipedia:
According to the Daily Bulletin, on May 18, 2005 Michael G. Wilson while speaking to students at Harvey Mudd stated, "I know that many of you have questions about the next James Bond film. I generally get asked the same questions wherever I go. I've found that nine answers will take care of most of those questions."
"I don't know which actor; January 17; October 19, 2006; Aston Martin; 'Casino Royale'; Martin Campbell; Prague and South Africa; yes, Judi Dench will be back; and no, Halle Berry won't reprise, but I'd love to make another film with her."
As of May 18, 2005 no actor has been chosen for the role of James Bond.
January 17, 2006 is the first day of filming.
The date October 19, 2006 is currently unknown, but speculated to be the tentative release date for the film.

I don't know if January 17th will be the definite first day of filming, but if EoN doesn't have their stuff sorted out by then, then I'd rather have them postpone the movie until they do (even though TND was made on a rushed schedule and turned out fine. However, they already had a cast, definite locations as well as a decided direction to take the series in unlike CR.) If this means that I have to wait a few extra months for a quality movie, then so be it.

[k13oharts]

As far as casting, I won't get into using vicious language, but since actors start projeccts so far in advance, you have to get them before (or else) you can't use them (Clive Owen for example).

You've got a good point there.

[Bon-san]

I deem Eon irresponsible in the fact that there has been no announcement of an official start date for shooting and no release date for CR whenever it's finished.  As far as casting, I won't get into using vicious language, but since actors start projeccts so far in advance, you have to get them before you can't use them (Clive Owen for example).  Campbell will probably not direct the next Bond film after this, so the producers should have cast Bond already.  The script is finished, unless they are just rewriting some scenes.  Location shoots for things like buildings and mountains should be taking place now. 

Just because Eon has not made any official announcements regarding the status/progress of pre-production, doesn't mean they've not done anything. For we all know, they have: all roles cast (including Bond); a finished script; with all locations scouted, and ready for shooting. And perhaps they're just waiting for a certain date to make announcements.

Of course, they may not have any of these things nailed down either.

Personally, I would guess the reality is somewhere in the middle. They've probably done lots of pre-prod work, and they probably have lots more to do. But as shooting is not set to begin until mid-January, there's lots of time yet.

Regardless, I'm not worried. They've been doing this for a loooooong time.


For anyone jonesing for a Bond fix, Renard has put up a new trailer in the music section. Top notch as usual! [and for the uninitiated, he's produced several others, all of them cracking good fun, and all findable somewhere in the backlog of the Music section]

[k13oharts]

Regardless, I'm not worried.  They've been doing this for a loooooong time.

We've got nothing to worry about. Sony/EON has lots.
They're putting at least some effort into giving us a new movie.
Well, not just another movie... it's Bond.
Let's consider ourselves lucky that at least we're getting another one meaning it's not at all the end. After all, tomorrow never dies.

[K1Bond007]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

The question is - does Sony have the clout to impose anything on EON. After all EON/Danjaq have owned the Bond franchise outright since the 1990s when the Broccoli's got MGM's 50-percent share.

They do? I was under the impression UA owned the other 50 percent and still does. Do you have any source on this? The legal wranglings of the early 90's was Cubby v Parretti because Parretti attempted to sell the television rights for Bond without talking to Danjaq about it.

[Skin 17]

I am afraid that Sony will deny us Bond fans what we want the most, a decent Bond movie. Sony wants to make another larger than life Bond adventure like Die Another Day.

[K1Bond007]

I am afraid that Sony will deny us Bond fans what we want the most, a decent Bond movie. Sony wants to make another larger than life Bond adventure like Die Another Day.

I have a feeling Sony's gonna let EON do its thing for the most part on this first one, but base what it does next entirely on the performance of Casino Royale. If CR sucks box office wise, you'll see another Moonraker/Die Another Day clone and more Sony intervention to ensure that Bond remains a lucrative franchise.

[Loeffelholz]

I agree that Sony will let Eon carry the ball for CR. If they fumble it...all bets are off for Bond 22, and I join in the prediction that a follow-up to a failed CR will probably look---a lot---like Die Another Day.

[Agent007.5]

I think Sony will let Eon handle all the production stuff, unless the make a mistake that Sony find "fiancially irresponsible" (such as hiring the wrong actor to play Bond), but then Sony will handle all the release stuff, such as selecting a release date, etc. (hopefully the don't do what they did with The Pink Panther, which was delayed by six months, for no reason other than the fact that Sony wants to market the film themselves). So I think for CR they will give Eon the majority of the responsibility of making CR, But if CR is a complete fiancial disaster, there will be some major changes with the production team for Bond 22.

[k13oharts]

With regards to product placement...
I think Bond would be using Sony products as well.
(Let's not forget the car tv in You Only Live Twice... it's a Sony. )
Production would be considerably a bit more cheaper when using products manufactured by the same company.

Examples:
* Sony Ericsson mobile phones might make an appearance in the movie.
* The Sony car tv might return as an added feature by Q.
* Q Branch members would be modifying Sony products for use in the field
(the ghetto blaster, was that a Sony too, I don't recall).
* Briefing screens would be wide-screen Sony.
* Extras would be using Sony Attrac CD/MP3 players in the background.
* The crew would be using Sony audio/video products.
* Sony would have an input into the production of the video game developed by EA.

[Loomis]

I am afraid that Sony will deny us Bond fans what we want the most, a decent Bond movie. Sony wants to make another larger than life Bond adventure like Die Another Day.

With Daniel Craig as Bond? And Matthew Vaughn in the director's chair?

Okay, Craig seems out of the question now, and we all know who's directing CASINO ROYALE, but this would seem to indicate that Sony wants a Bond film closer to, say, THE BOURNE SUPREMACY or BATMAN BEGINS than DIE ANOTHER DAY. And rightly so, IMO.

[DLibrasnow]

Do you think Sony will try to put its own "stamp" on CASINO ROYALE, or will the studio just leave Eon to get on with it?

The question is - does Sony have the clout to impose anything on EON. After all EON/Danjaq have owned the Bond franchise outright since the 1990s when the Broccoli's got MGM's 50-percent share.

They do? I was under the impression UA owned the other 50 percent and still does. Do you have any source on this?

Yes, the information comes from an article that John Cork wrote for GOLDENEYE magazine. Cubby bought the 50 percent back from MGM/UA in the 1990s.

The Cork story was cited in a CBn thread on this subject. It first came to light on these forums two years ago and when the question was raised again last year I bumped the thread up.

I know that zencat made the statement that if Cork said it was so, then it was since {paraphrasing him} when EON wants to know something about James Bond - they call John Cork.

[Pussfeller]

With regards to product placement...
I think Bond would be using Sony products as well.
(Let's not forget the car tv in You Only Live Twice... it's a Sony. )
Production would be considerably a bit more cheaper when using products manufactured by the same company.

Examples:
* Sony Ericsson mobile phones might make an appearance in the movie.
* The Sony car tv might return as an added feature by Q.
* Q Branch members would be modifying Sony products for use in the field
(the ghetto blaster, was that a Sony too, I don't recall).
* Briefing screens would be wide-screen Sony.
* Extras would be using Sony Attrac CD/MP3 players in the background.
* The crew would be using Sony audio/video products.
* Sony would have an input into the production of the video game developed by EA.

At least we won't see Bond holding up a can of Pepsi, or something as blatant and out of character as that. They'll undoubtedly supply all the electronics, and maybe we'll see some billboards. Actually, if you consider the brand references from Fleming's novels, product placement is a part of the Bond canon. Of course, Fleming mentioned products Bond might actually use, and they weren't all from the same company. Anyway...

I don't think Sony will meddle too much in EON's affairs. If CR is a success, even a moderate one, they'll probably leave them alone. If it isn't as successful as DAD, they may start giving them notes. If it's more successful than DAD (as I predict it will be), EON will be left to their own devices, unless the executives at Sony are utter imbeciles.

[DLibrasnow]

K13 I found the thread mentioned above and have bumped it back up.

CBn Staff member doublenoughtspy was the member who wrote:

Goldeneye Issue 4, Spring 1996

Article: The Road to Goldeneye by John Cork

"In the 1980s, Cubby and Dana Broccoli bought out United Artists' 50% share of Danjaq, which UA had obtained from Harry Saltzman in 1975. As sole owner of Danjaq, Broccoli maintained total creative control over the James Bond product, but MGM/UA were increasingly demanding greater involvement"

[Pussfeller]

Maybe Sony will stay out of things. They wouldn't want to scare away their biggest (perhaps only) cash cow. Right now, Bond is Sony's only sure thing, as far as films are concerned. They really need the Bond franchise to be healthy and productive.