Craig Signs new Contract
#1
Posted 16 July 2006 - 10:14 PM
http://www.hollywood...tail/id/3531759
http://www.pr-inside...bond-r11641.htm
http://www.contactmu..... bond_1002639
All in the last 8 hours
#2
Posted 16 July 2006 - 10:45 PM
#3
Posted 16 July 2006 - 10:51 PM
#4
Posted 16 July 2006 - 11:15 PM
But anyway, if this is at all true, it's a good sign that Sony's happy enough to let Craig sign on for the next one.
#5
Posted 16 July 2006 - 11:17 PM
Reports have said he signed a 3 film contract, others said 3 with 4th option, others said till 2012 - nothings been official announced.I thought Craig had already been contracted for three Bond films...
#6
Posted 16 July 2006 - 11:22 PM
#7
Posted 17 July 2006 - 12:04 AM
DANIEL CRAIG WILL RETURN
#8
Posted 17 July 2006 - 01:20 AM
Really I find it amazing that anyone would take a report from what is essentially a glorified tabloid seriously.
I am certain that Craig signed a three-picture deal (with an option on a fourth) last October.
#9
Posted 17 July 2006 - 01:22 AM
#10
Posted 17 July 2006 - 01:43 AM
It wasn't even right at the time - given that he had already signed a 3 picture deal as is the norm.
#11
Posted 17 July 2006 - 01:43 AM
#12
Posted 17 July 2006 - 04:18 AM
I would love to see what the stipulations and contingencies are in his contract too. I mean, would his three picture deal be based on how successful he is? I just dont think contracts are what they used to be and if he flops at the box office, they can just buy him out and move on to the next Bond search...(UGH!)
I assume there's a clause giving the studios the right to terminate it under certain conditions or as you said, buy him out.
Edited by Andrew, 17 July 2006 - 04:19 AM.
#13
Posted 17 July 2006 - 04:32 AM
Not like this was news anyway.
#14
Posted 17 July 2006 - 06:01 AM
I mean, they found Sid Vicious suicide note once, when he made a suicide attempt in 1978, and for the anniversary of his death 25 later, it was suddenly "discovered" for the first time, (when it existed printed in many books since)... just news to keep something in the public eye.
#15
Posted 17 July 2006 - 09:52 AM
LOL "News of the World" is hardly a reliable source for news.
Really I find it amazing that anyone would take a report from what is essentially a glorified tabloid.
Glorified? Hardly.
You've been away too long. It doesn't pretend to be anything other than it is and wears it's tabloid status quite proudly.
#16
Posted 18 July 2006 - 03:18 PM
For my money, he'll make just the three films. By that point he'll have had enough of it all. I do think he'll be successful though, and I imagine many people will be disappointed when he eventually leaves the role.