171 replies to this topic

[tdalton]

The more I think about it, the more I am against this idea. I don't want them to rush Bond 2.2 out just to have a film out in 2007. I'd rather them take their time, get a good cast in there instead of just getting whatever they can get on short notice, and get the script just right instead of just rushing to the screen whatever they have at the end of this year just to capitalize on a marketing ploy.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Yeah, it's gotta be true:




2007

Comon!

[The Dove]

I'm with Tarl on this.. This is a once-in-a-thousand years opportunity.. I'm sure EON don't want to wait until 3007 to release a Bond film in a year ending with 007!!!

[Mike00spy]

So the year ends in 007? That is enough to rush out a new movie, and take a hit on their profits?

It is not the best idea, no matter how much we would love to see another Bond movie. The audience for Bond just can't make up us Bond fantatics, they need to get the average moviegoer to see the film. They will not do that if they release movies in consecutive years.

[DLibrasnow]

and get the script just right instead of just rushing to the screen whatever they have at the end of this year just to capitalize on a marketing ploy.

But you are missing the fact that they have been working on the script since at least last October. They are not rushing anything to the screen. They didn't work on a cast for Casino Royale until they had Craig in place last October either so there's nothing to suggest that they will be rushing the casting process here.

Plus, since Bond 2.2 is supposed to continue on from Casino Royale there is nothing to suggest that some of the same cast might not return. Also in the 1960s they had Bond movies in consecutive years and we also had some of the strongest casts.

[Dalton]

The more I think about it, the more I am against this idea. I don't want them to rush Bond 2.2 out just to have a film out in 2007. I'd rather them take their time, get a good cast in there instead of just getting whatever they can get on short notice, and get the script just right instead of just rushing to the screen whatever they have at the end of this year just to capitalize on a marketing ploy.

What? Take their time like they did on DAD??? That turned out well didn't it.

They're hardly rushing things, B22 has been in develpment for over a year now. That fit's the normal 2 year cycle.

[Orion]

So the year ends in 007? That is enough to rush out a new movie, and take a hit on their profits?

It is not the best idea, no matter how much we would love to see another Bond movie. The audience for Bond just can't make up us Bond fantatics, they need to get the average moviegoer to see the film. They will not do that if they release movies in consecutive years.

you are aware the second most successfull film of all time, Lord Of the Rings : The Return Of The King was reeased one year after it's predessesor as was the fourth most successfull fim, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Goldfinger was reeased after From Russia with love only 7 mounths later,

so, in the words of a friend of mine...SWISH

[DLibrasnow]

So the year ends in 007? That is enough to rush out a new movie, and take a hit on their profits?

It is not the best idea, no matter how much we would love to see another Bond movie. The audience for Bond just can't make up us Bond fantatics, they need to get the average moviegoer to see the film. They will not do that if they release movies in consecutive years.

you are aware the second most successfull film of all time, Lord Of the Rings : The Return Of The King was reeased one year after it's predessesor as was the fourth most successfull fim, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Goldfinger was reeased after From Russia with love only 7 mounths later,

so, in the words of a friend of mine...SWISH

Precisely...I think a number of Bond fans seem to think that putting out a movie in 2007 would be "rushing" it out to the theater. That would be the case if they were going to wait until they were done with Casino Royale before starting on the next movie, but we have evidence (from the mouth of Micheal G. Wilson no less) that they have been working on Bond 2.2 for months now.

Really, when it comes down to whether I believe the naysayers on CBn or Micheal G. Wilson - I'll go with Wilson anyday.

Why would they have started work on the Bond 2.2 script in 2005 if they were planning on releasing the movie in 2008! I mean really people, think about it!

[Mike00spy]

you are aware the second most successfull film of all time, Lord Of the Rings : The Return Of The King was reeased one year after it's predessesor as was the fourth most successfull fim, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Goldfinger was reeased after From Russia with love only 7 mounths later


Actually, using LOTR and Potter doesn't really help your comparison.

Return of the King made more money than the rest b/c it was the end of the trilogy, and fans have been waiting forever since the books came out. It is really one big story. They also knew that this would be the final LOTR film of all time.

Harry Potter films are based on books as well. Those have to come out ever year or 18 months or we'd have a 30 year old playing a teenager. Besides, each potter film made less money than the previous ones except for Goblet of Fire. (Don't know why Chamber of Secrets was mentioned- it made about 100 million less than the original) And GOF still made about 90 million less than the original film.

And speaking of those films, they have returns that would give Wilson a heart attack. Even the worst performer of LOTR made 869 million world wide. Worst Potter made 794 million. The Best bond can manage was DAD's 450 million.


I know it is hard to accept but not everyone loves Bond. Bond 22 (if released in 2007) will not make as much money as Casino Royale. Simple as that.






Bond 22 (if released in 07) will be lucky to make close to the same as Casino Royale.

[Tiin007]

Bond 22 (if released in 07) will be lucky to make close to the same as Casino Royale.

And what if CR becomes a mega-hit and makes 700 million. Then what? If Bond 2.2 makes close to that, it will be the 2nd highest grossing Bond film of all time (next to CR).

[Blofeld's Cat]

Not too sure it'll be "back-to-back" filming, but I wouldn't be surprised if the gap between the two movies is similiar to that between Live And Let Die and The Man With The Golden Gun.

[Loomis]

Why would they have started work on the Bond 2.2 script in 2005 if they were planning on releasing the movie in 2008! I mean really people, think about it!

Because scripts can take a long while, especially with all the rewrites needed on something like a Bond flick?

If getting a movie out in 2007 was so important, I'd have thought delaying the release of CASINO ROYALE by a couple of months or even moving it to early May '07 would be far more doable than cranking out BOND 22.

[Mike00spy]

Brosnan's films made 353, 346, 352, and 450 million. It is a nice thought, but it is not really possible.

[tdalton]

Why would they have started work on the Bond 2.2 script in 2005 if they were planning on releasing the movie in 2008! I mean really people, think about it!

Because scripts can take a long while, especially with all the rewrites needed on something like a Bond flick?

If getting a movie out in 2007 was so important, I'd have thought delaying the release of CASINO ROYALE by a couple of months or even moving it to early May '07 would be far more doable than cranking out BOND 22.

That's what I'm thinking. If they had to have a film out in 2007, then it would have (or should have) been Casino Royale. I realize that they have put two films out in consecutive years before, but that was when Saltzman and Cubby were running EON. I'm not sure that the current EON leadership can do that and still put out a quality product, although I wouldn't mind being proven wrong on this point.

[DanMan]

Brosnan's films made 353, 346, 352, and 450 million. It is a nice thought, but it is not really possible.

Too be honest, I'd be shocked if CR made any less than 500 million WW. I know it sounds stupidly optimistic, but I think this movie is on it's way to becoming a mega-hit.

[Tiin007]

Too be honest, I'd be shocked if CR made any less than 500 million WW. I know it sounds stupidly optimistic, but I think this movie is on it's way to becoming a mega-hit.

I completely agree. This movie is destined for glory, especially with all the publicity it's getting.

[DLibrasnow]

Why would they have started work on the Bond 2.2 script in 2005 if they were planning on releasing the movie in 2008! I mean really people, think about it!

Because scripts can take a long while, especially with all the rewrites needed on something like a Bond flick?

THREE YEARS. Now I know Purvis and Wade are less than great scriptwriters, but are you seriously saying that the script for Bond 2.2 will be worked on for two and a half years?

We know Bond 2.2 follows on directly from the end of Casino Royale so they obviously had the story outlined before the press conference in 2005. I would be surprised if the first draft hasn't already been submitted, yet you are suggesting that the start of filming is a little under two years away.

I don't see why they would not be able to. This is after all the same team that wanted to run a Jinx series at the same time as a James Bond series.
Even more so than EON I think Sony might be more pushing this i) to try and cement Craig as 007 and ii) to try and cut down on costs.

[mario007]

can somebody please explain to me how this would cut down cost. If B22 starts filming in Jan 07, with most of the same crew ... what would be the cost effectiveness?

Also wouldn't the continuation of the CR story mean that Campbell would helm the next pic as well.

[JimmyBond]

Also wouldn't the continuation of the CR story mean that Campbell would helm the next pic as well.

No.

[dunmall]

i find this discussion rather interesting, a few months back some people claim that Brosnan would be asked back if Craig fails because of the DAF precedent causing an argument, now the precedent set by LALD & MWTGG (a more similar situation than with the early connerys) is starting another argument....

but back on topic... i think and hope that it is possible to have Bond 22 (2.2 what ever) out in 2007, it would be nice

[Double-Oh Agent]

Paul Haggis didn't start rewrites on Casino Royale until mid-October--at the earliest--and was done by late January. I don't see why that couldn't be done again on Bond 22 or why that would be considered rushing the film into production for late 2007.

As for casting, Debbie McWilliams and company will have finished their duties on Casino Royale this summer which should give them plenty of time to view potential actors for Bond 22. Likewise, the location scout team will be available this summer to begin scouting locations for Bond 22, and again that should be enough time to find the sites they're looking for.

The only red flags I see in this scenario is Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli having to divide their time between making pre-production decisions on Bond 22 and production/post production decisions on Casino Royale. But since there is two of them, I don't see why they couldn't split up and each take a film much like Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman alternated overseeing the 007 films in the last few years of their partnership.

And lastly, I don't know why so many of you are complaining about this 007 in 2007 scenario. A large majority of the CBn posters seem to really like everything EON/Sony has done on Casino Royale all the way from story to casting to publicity decisions so why doubt them now? To paraphrase another successful movie series: it would appear that the force is with them.

[Skudor]

Paul Haggis didn't start rewrites on Casino Royale until mid-October--at the earliest--and was done by late January. I don't see why that couldn't be done again on Bond 22 or why that would be considered rushing the film into production for late 2007.

As for casting, Debbie McWilliams and company will have finished their duties on Casino Royale this summer which should give them plenty of time to view potential actors for Bond 22. Likewise, the location scout team will be available this summer to begin scouting locations for Bond 22, and again that should be enough time to find the sites they're looking for.

The only red flags I see in this scenario is Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli having to divide their time between making pre-production decisions on Bond 22 and production/post production decisions on Casino Royale. But since there is two of them, I don't see why they couldn't split up and each take a film much like Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman alternated overseeing the 007 films in the last few years of their partnership.

And lastly, I don't know why so many of you are complaining about this 007 in 2007 scenario. A large majority of the CBn posters seem to really like everything EON/Sony has done on Casino Royale all the way from story to casting to publicity decisions so why doubt them now? To paraphrase another successful movie series: it would appear that the force is with them.

Some good points - particularly re the casting, location scouting and script.

I don't think there is anything standing in the way of the practicality of doing the next film in 2007 - I don't believe for a minute that they should need more than 18 months before filming to complete the script, which is the minumum they have.

Perhaps the gap is too short - people won't be hungry enough for a new Bond. Or perhaps they like what they see in CR and can't wait for more. It can go either way. I certainly won't dismiss the idea that the producers and the studio notice that 2007 is a pretty damn cool year to release a Bond film in!

I'd guess that the studio could be asked to greenlight the project after seeing an early version/footage from CR this summer.

One thing I have wondered a little about, is whether a shorter gap may be something Craig would want - assuming he'd want to do his 3+ Bond films in a short space of time and then get on with other things. It's pure speculation, but I think it has some logic to it considering his initial reluctance to take on the role.

At this point in time I think it is very possible that we'll get a Bond in 2007.

[Hitchcock Bond]

I believe that EON had originally planned a 2005 release for Bond 21 and a 2007 for 22. There is no reason that Bond 22 couldn't start in Jan/Feb 2007 for a November/December release. Craig should complete shooting (with the possible exception of some post-production reshoots) by July. That would still give him time to take a break then possibly another role that could finish around November in time to promote Bond. He clearly is a hard working actor as evidenced by multiple releases this year, so it's possible he could take on Bond 22 early next year. I know they have been working on the script but that's a long way from getting a production on the scale of a Bond film under way. Remember all the problems they had with casting, and even had to start shooting without a Vesper or Le Chiffre ready. As much as I would like to see another Bond film in 2007, and as much as it's logistically possible to produce one, I suspect that EON/Sony would like to see how fans and critics take to the new Bond. This would give them enough time to rework any problems that fans may have with the new Bond. Also the Sony marketing machine will be focused on its biggest probable earner for 2007 Spiderman 3.

Edited by Hitchcock Bond, 05 May 2006 - 12:49 PM.

[belvedere]

The key missing ingredient that many of you have not noted is that the delay between recent films has been due to the actor playing Bond. Brosnan wanted a three year break between TWINE and DAD. Craig may not object to back to back years. Not only that, but if principal photography wraps in July, he has six months between films.

Bond 22 in 2007 is very doable and I believe it will happen.

[DLibrasnow]

I suspect that EON/Sony would like to see how fans and critics take to the new Bond. This would give them enough time to rework any problems that fans may have with the new Bond. Also the Sony marketing machine will be focused on its biggest probable earner for 2007 Spiderman 3.

Actually I suspect that they want to get Bond 2.2 into the cinemas as fast as possible precisely because of the Craig factor.
We all know that Craig is not the Bond we have all grown to know and love until the end of Casino Royale. It makes sense to me that the Bond producers would want to follow the movie up as fast as possible with something a little more traditional.
Plus reports say that Bond 2.2 follows on directly from the end of Casino Royale, it's possible that a number of the actors from Casino Royale will also appear in Bond 2.2. I am huessing they will want to keep the (possibnle cliffhanger?) ending to Casino Royale still fresh in peoples minds for Bond 2.2.
Of course nobody (outside of the EON inner circle) knows for sure, I just believe the evidence is mounting that we can expect a Bond 2.2 in 2007.

[Solaris]

I believe it is entirely possible to get a Bond film out in 2007, It was mentioned somewhere that there is going to be a three film story arch, Casino Royale, Bond 22, Bond 23. this means when Casino Roylale's script was being written Pervis &wade had an Idea of where the story was headed, which means writing a follow on script is much easier for them than writting a brand new story.
If they shoot in late January they can have a film out in november again, but If CR flops, and I mean Seriously Flops, It won't though, they can still cancel Bond 22's Shooting and work out what they're going to do.

If Harry Potter and Lord of the rings, which are a lot more CGI extreme than the bond films, 007 can certainly do it.

Bring on 2007

PS, Hi By the Way

Edited by Solaris, 07 May 2006 - 10:21 AM.

[belvedere]

I agree that if CR builds to the buzz level I expect, getting another Bond film into the studio sooner rather than later is smart.

Also, why would EON announce the Activision deal for Bond 22 now if the game wasn't coming out until 2008? That also points to 2007 for Bond 22.

007 in 2007 - bank on it!

[sir_hilary_bray]

I'm with Tarl on this.. This is a once-in-a-thousand years opportunity.. I'm sure EON don't want to wait until 3007 to release a Bond film in a year ending with 007!!!

I agree too. HOW COULD THEY NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS? There has to be SOMETHING planned for '007. If they cannot have a good movie out for the year, then they really should have something special out. I'll even settle for some kind of t.v. special documentary about the Bond movies and books.
Pierce Brosnan is going to start filming a new movie with Rachel McAdams soon. How silly would it seem if that movie came out in November or December of 2007, but no Bond anywhere? I'm a Pierce Brosnan fan, so that's fine with me, but sheesh. They really should have something out for next year, right?

[Solex Agitator]

When I clicked on this thread, I thought the thread's title was a suggestion that "007" be Bond 22's title...

[Flash1087]

I'm not going to throw my hat into the ring of speculation as to whether or not there WILL be a Bond 22 in 2007.

All I'm going to say is that I'd REALLY like to see another Bond movie in 2007.