4014 replies to this topic

[SecretAgentFan]

One can only hope that it will be the upcoming Cannes Film Festival where news like these always get lots of attention.

 

But if nothing will be decided this year, MGM will soon want a new Bond film because... frankly, which other film can earn them enough to sustain their business?  This year they might ride out on SPECTRE´s earnings.  But let another year go by...

[Dustin]

I suppose they must have a deal by the end of this year or the dials on MGM's executive floor turn from amber to red. Which of course the studio execs interested in Bond will know, too...

[DavidJones]

Am I right in saying this issue and all the ones preceding it is because HarrySaltzman did not sell his 50% snbare in Eon to Cubby?

[Dustin]

I believe the angle is actually Danjaq and as such a little more complicated. But regardless, it's difficult to judge any of this because none of us has been present back in 1975. We don't know what price Saltzman's asked (or what sum actually changed hands for that matter.) United Artists had their own stake in the business from the go and was surely protected for their part. It not necessarily follows from Saltzman's move that all this could have been avoided if he just had sold to Broccoli instead. The crucial element is how United Artists changed hands and how MGM developed since roughly the mid-90s. But nobody sets out with the aim to turn a creative and successful treasure trove into a run down rehash operation. That just happens along the way...

[SecretAgentFan]

Quite right.  In the end, it is - unfortunately - all about too many people who want to profit from a proven commodity.  And United Artists, while a terrific idea at the start, crashed down into a pile of problems - and MGM now has a similar ongoing crisis since nothing but Bond works for them.

 

If only EON could own "the whole Bond" it would be a much easier life for them.  And the fans. 

[byline]

Back to the original question of who I'd like to see play James Bond, I've been watching the miniseries, The Night Manager, and I can easily see Tom Hiddleston in this role.

[Vauxhall]

One British bookmaker has suspended bets on Tom Hiddleston, after he was reportedly spotted meeting Barbara Broccoli and Sam Mendes earlier this week.

http://www.telegraph...end-betting-af/

[Dustin]

Wouldn't surprise me at all. And would not have to mean anything either way. I struggle - in vain - to find an explanation why Mendes would be in the picture again. Does he really think he's left something to say on Bond?

[SecretAgentFan]

It might just have been a friendly, private meeting.  

 

Unless EON thinks that there is an opportunity now to do one last CraigBond film sooner than later, and therefore wants Mendes to come back once more.

 

Or... they consider Mendes to be the perfect director (because he knows the process now) to introduce a new actor. 

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Today's Daily Mail is also running with the story

http://www.dailymail...nd-job-bag.html

[SecretAgentFan]

Oops, I only read at first that BB was meeting with Mendes.  Including Hiddleston paints a very different picture.

 

Wow.

 

And that´s what will make it interesting for Mendes: introducing a new actor as Bond.

 

Hopefully, we´ll hear something official in the next weeks.

[Odd Jobbies]

I'd guess Mendes is there as an advisor - i doubt they'll get him back into the director's chair so soon, if at all. He could perhaps even take a Producer credit if Eon feel so dependent upon his input. No bad thing - he and Logan have fashioned a nice little tv series in Penny Dreadful from their distant producer's chairs.

 

On a broader note, it would be remiss of the team not to meet with Hiddleston. But i imagine this would be an introduction rather than a pitch. They'll be plenty of these meetings with other actors in preparation for Craig's resignation, even if he's doing B25 (which i hope he does).

[sharpshooter]

If we need a seventh Bond for Bond 25, I'd accept Tom with open arms. Let's get this show on the road.

[Dustin]

First things first: unless MGM can find a partner there will be no definite move on BOND 25. But Eon would be in the best position to get what they want if they can present the studio with a core team and concept already. Still wonder about Mendes. He is solid enough but it cannot really be said there is no future Bond film thinkable without his input, no?

[SecretAgentFan]

Not for me either - yet, it´s always better to have an already experienced director on board if a main element changes.  

 

I guess that´s why they asked Martin Campbell back for introducing Daniel Craig.

 

Also, in these days even an A-list director like Mendes has the hardest time to get a personal project green-lighted.  It really is only possible to get a film made if it is a comic book adaptation or a major bestseller.  Everything else has to go the route of low budget.  Maybe Mendes thinks: since I want to continue doing theatre (which does not pay well at all) it would be foolish of me to say no to a sizable offer from people who appreciate me.

 

Again, this might be just a meeting.  

 

Then again, if it has actually developed into a meeting between these three the probability of Hiddleston becoming Bond has risen considerably.

 

And regarding Hiddleston´s current status as developing into a major box office star I don´t see any reason why MGM or any other studio interested in distribution rights would veto him.

[Dustin]

Just so. Hiddleston is up-and-coming, popular and yet not too expensive to afford for even a scaled down production. Whether that's indeed any indicator of movement on BOND 25 remains to be seen. But I somehow doubt this meeting would have happened with these characters if there was absolutely no development on MGM's matters to be seen...

[SecretAgentFan]

I actually would welcome this instead of a long, too public search for the new Bond like in previous eras.

 

A quick decision would also signal that everybody involved knows what they want and where to go.

 

I wonder, however, whether someone like Hiddleston would have to do a screen test for Bond.  Since he already has proven himself more than Connery, Lazebby, Moore, Brosnan, Dalton or Craig did before becoming Bond, he could insist on "take me or leave me".

[tdalton]

As far as the bookmaker thing is concerned, it doesn't really mean anything.  The bookies closed betting on Bond #6 sometime in early 2005 with Dougray Scott and Clive Owen as the leading contenders to take over the part.  

 

None of the names being thrown around in the press really mean anything at the moment.  There is no distribution deal for MGM and EON still has an actor in place as Bond.

[Dustin]

Well, theoretically it's also possible they discussed a non-Bond project. But if that meeting has actually taken place in this manner I would not argue that Bond was not the topic discussed, in whatever state of seriousness.

As for "actor in place as Bond" - sorry, that doesn't wash. Eon had to look for replacements numerous times while there was still one actor 'in place'. The only consolation I can offer is that others have met with the powers-that-be and still didn't get the role. If that can be said to be consolation at all...

Let's wait and see.

[SecretAgentFan]

So far, Hiddleston was just the "flavor of the month"-rumor as Craig´s successor.

 

But a meeting with Mendes and Broccoli points very much in the direction of him being seriously considered.

 

If SPECTRE had not ended with the clear nod towards "this is Bond leaving the service" and Craig had not stated that he would only do another one for the money, I would still think we´re in the same situation as when Sir Roger was gambling for a higher fee after FYEO and OP.

 

Now, with a new distribution deal to be made, Craig going dark, Mark Strong´s giving away that his friend will hardly return as Bond, the costume designer already mentioning that she will be interested in dressing a new actor for the role - AND this meeting...

 

I would not be surprised if we got news very soon...

[Matt_13]

I want Daniel back for one more, but if we had to see a change, I'm all for Hiddles taking the reins. The Night Manager is wonderful. I'm more interested in the news that Mendes is still loosely involved. I imagine he's there as an advisor, as I can absolutely see Barbara respecting his opinion. He is a proper fan in addition to being a talented filmmaker, after all. I think he'd make an excellent producer for the series going forward. That being said, as others have mentioned, introducing a new actor into the role of Bond could be enough to entice Mendes back into the directors chair one more time, even if his friend is no longer the leading man. Time will tell. Nice to have at least a small scrap of news in any event. Hopefully this MGM nonsense gets settled faster than last time.

[Tiin007]

As to the above suggestion of giving Mendes producer credit for Bond 25, I sincerely hope not. I cannot imagine his input (outside of possibly directing the film) to be crucial enough for such an appellation. (And, if Craig has indeed retired from the role, then I'd even argue that Craig's designation as "co-producer" in SP was likewise unnecessary. I had originally hoped that such a title would mean he'd stay on for at least Bond 25 as well.)

 

That being said, even though I think it's time for a new director to helm Bond 25, if Mendes is indeed directing the debut of Bond #7 (regardless of whether or not it's Hiddleston), at least it will allay one of my biggest fears-- namely, that we'll be seeing an overhaul of the MI6 crew. As Mendes has consistently touted his role in recasting M, Q, and Moneypenny in Skyfall, I feel like he will be keen to keep his precious additions into the next actor's era. For me, that is quite the consolation, as I find Fiennes, Whishaw, and Harris to be phenomenal in their respective roles. 

[SecretAgentFan]

Indeed - if Mendes directs the next one the Mi6 crew should stay as it is.  And that would also be the traditional way EON moves forward: keeping most of the familiar talent to surround an unfamiliar Bond.

[Dustin]

If SPECTRE had not ended with the clear nod towards "this is Bond leaving the service" and Craig had not stated that he would only do another one for the money, I would still think we´re in the same situation as when Sir Roger was gambling for a higher fee after FYEO and OP.

It's possible we actually do look at a very similar situation here, Moore's gambling and, up to a point, Brosnan's position after DAD. In the end it all comes down to the numbers again.

Regardless how you look at it, financially SPECTRE was still a decent success. It earned serious money and the gap to SKYFALL is by no means so wide as to suggest the previous film was entirely playing in its own league. Neither was Craig responsible for the lacklustre US box office nor for the lukewarm response of American critics. And especially not for Sony's absurd deal with MGM that left them behind with a tall bill and very meagre returns to show for their pains. So one thing we may be reasonably sure of: Craig's price for one more film will be at least that of his SPECTRE paycheque, regardless of his producer credit. Craig will certainly not go home with less.

Enter Sam Mendes. Most of what I stated for Craig holds true for him as well, with some licence to SPECTRE's weak script and its problems that he should have tackled as the responsible director, but for whatever reason didn't. Anyway, I strongly doubt he will return to 007 for less than what he got for the last time. So now we're talking about a project that doesn't have a studio, a distributor or a budget yet - but whatever the budget may be a huge chunk of it will be gone by the moment Mendes, Craig or both will sign their contracts.

Since we also know that up to now no studio was stupid enough to fall for MGM's terms and conditions the way Sony did, we can with reasonable certainty guess that a distributor deal will have details and specifics differing from the last one. From this I would conclude that firstly a budget for BOND 25 will not skyrocket in the way SPECTRE's did and that, secondly, it's unlikely that both return, Craig and Mendes.

So this snippet of news would indeed mean a solution to MGM's situation is close and that the direction for BOND 25 is that of the entire series. Forward.

[S K Y F A L L]

Started watching The Night Manager, thrilling!

Hiddleston is great but I want a younger Bond and much different Bond then Craig's Bond. 

Edited by S K Y F A L L, 16 May 2016 - 01:01 AM.

[DaveBond21]

So this snippet of news would indeed mean a solution to MGM's situation is close and that the direction for BOND 25 is that of the entire series. Forward. 

 

 

Interesting take on the news. Some people have suggested that we are a long way from the next Bond film being made but I prefer your optimism.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

[Gobi-1]

I kind of feel like this would be a Roger Moore type situation. Instead of casting an unknown or relatively unknown actor to play Bond on the heels of an extremely popular star, they instead cast an established actor that already has a fan base and the proven chops the play the role.

 

On a side note I was hired to be an extra for the Tom Hiddleston starring Hank Williams biopic "I Saw the Light" when it was filming in Shreveport, LA back in October of 2014 and while I never got to be in the background of a scene with him I did get to see him in costume hanging out with Elizabeth Olsen at the craft service tables. It would be awesome if he was cast so I can claim I have seen James Bond in real life.

[byline]

One British bookmaker has suspended bets on Tom Hiddleston, after he was reportedly spotted meeting Barbara Broccoli and Sam Mendes earlier this week.

http://www.telegraph...end-betting-af/

Wow! I was just speculating. I had no idea there was any sort of actual meeting in the works.

[Dustin]

So this snippet of news would indeed mean a solution to MGM's situation is close and that the direction for BOND 25 is that of the entire series. Forward.

Interesting take on the news. Some people have suggested that we are a long way from the next Bond film being made but I prefer your optimism.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

It's still possible we're a long way from movement on MGM and thus from BOND 25's early stages of preproduction. But if there was absolutely no sign of hope on the horizon a meeting of Broccoli, Mendes and Hiddleston would hardly make much sense. They could talk all they wanted and agree on whatever, without MGM returning to the table with a strong partner there will be no production. Mind you, this is what happens all the time in the business, for every finished production there are literally countless others left in limbo.

[SecretAgentFan]

 

If SPECTRE had not ended with the clear nod towards "this is Bond leaving the service" and Craig had not stated that he would only do another one for the money, I would still think we´re in the same situation as when Sir Roger was gambling for a higher fee after FYEO and OP.
 

It's possible we actually do look at a very similar situation here, Moore's gambling and, up to a point, Brosnan's position after DAD. In the end it all comes down to the numbers again.

Regardless how you look at it, financially SPECTRE was still a decent success. It earned serious money and the gap to SKYFALL is by no means so wide as to suggest the previous film was entirely playing in its own league. Neither was Craig responsible for the lacklustre US box office nor for the lukewarm response of American critics. And especially not for Sony's absurd deal with MGM that left them behind with a tall bill and very meagre returns to show for their pains. So one thing we may be reasonably sure of: Craig's price for one more film will be at least that of his SPECTRE paycheque, regardless of his producer credit. Craig will certainly not go home with less.

Enter Sam Mendes. Most of what I stated for Craig holds true for him as well, with some licence to SPECTRE's weak script and its problems that he should have tackled as the responsible director, but for whatever reason didn't. Anyway, I strongly doubt he will return to 007 for less than what he got for the last time. So now we're talking about a project that doesn't have a studio, a distributor or a budget yet - but whatever the budget may be a huge chunk of it will be gone by the moment Mendes, Craig or both will sign their contracts.

Since we also know that up to now no studio was stupid enough to fall for MGM's terms and conditions the way Sony did, we can with reasonable certainty guess that a distributor deal will have details and specifics differing from the last one. From this I would conclude that firstly a budget for BOND 25 will not skyrocket in the way SPECTRE's did and that, secondly, it's unlikely that both return, Craig and Mendes.

So this snippet of news would indeed mean a solution to MGM's situation is close and that the direction for BOND 25 is that of the entire series. Forward.

 

 

Absolutely, great analysis!

 

I also believe that EON, MGM and any future distributor will all want to keep the budget in check.  So Craig might also have priced himself out of the running - as Brosnan did back then.  It will be more feasible to have a new Bond come in and use a scaled-down approach - like they seem to do it anyway after four films.

 

I can imagine, by the way, that Mendes would even agree to return not for more money but an equal sum because, really, the business is extremely tough right now, even for established directors.  Gone are the times when directors could easily ask for more and more.  The studios will rather go to younger, more easily handled and cheaper candidates because their numbers crunchers will state: it doesn´t matter who directs, it´s all in the branding.