91 replies to this topic

[killkenny kid]

Good news, I love my Bond with a chill in the air.

[dee-bee-five]

I'm gutted that BOND 22 isn't going to be a summer movie.

It's not that I wanted to watch the followup to CASINO ROYALE at the earliest possible opportunity (although, of course, I did, and I'm sure you did, too ), but I really loved the news that Bond would be summer fare again. It doesn't belong in the cold winter months.

Oh, I don't know - Dr No, FRWL, Goldfinger, Thunderball, OHMSS, DAF, TMWTGG, GE, TND, TWINE and DAD were all autumn/winter releases - in the UK at least. That's more than half the series. Not a bad tradition, that.

[Judo chop]

Summer or Fall makes no difference to me; only their motive for rescheduling really matters. If in fact they are 'scared' of competition, or do not feel good about the final product of CR, then I see it as a problem.
Fortunately, I don't think either of the two are true. So... no problem I guess.

It just gives me a another few months to watch my CR DVD over and over and over...

[Daddy Bond]

I fear this will descend into yet more "completely accurate box office impact analysis" / "they are running scared because they have cast a deformed goblin" / "horrendously boring guesswork" very soon.

Whereas, the reality is common sense and box office expediency kicking in.

Absolutely. Although Bond would defeat Iron Man at the box office IMO, still a later release might mean better box office pure and simple.

Regards

[Loomis]

It's hardly a big deal that we'll have to wait a few extra months to see BOND 22, but, still, I'd really love Bond to be summer fare again - heck, just once would be enough. Also, the recent official announcement of a May release for 22 seemed to show huge confidence in the series; regardless of the motives for postponing it, there's an inevitable sense of defeatism in the air.

[Daddy Bond]

It's hardly a big deal that we'll have to wait a few extra months to see BOND 22, but, still, I'd really love Bond to be summer fare again - heck, just once would be enough. Also, the recent official announcement of a May release for 22 seemed to show huge confidence in the series; regardless of the motives for postponing it, there's an inevitable sense of defeatism in the air.

Really, Loomis? Defeatism?

Not here at Commander Bond though - or is this something you ARE sensing here or from some other source?

Regards

[DamnCoffee]

I really wanted a summer Bond aswell but i guess we'll have to wait another 6 months

[JimmyBond]

. Also, the recent official announcement of a May release for 22 seemed to show huge confidence in the series; regardless of the motives for postponing it, there's an inevitable sense of defeatism in the air.

Well, when they made the announcment they were probably rather confident that Michell was going to sign on as director. When he didn't sign, that put a halt to there schedule. They probably intended to begin post-production on Bond22 after he signed on. With no director it will be rather difficult to do that, no?

Make's sense to me.

[Harmsway]

Also, the recent official announcement of a May release for 22 seemed to show huge confidence in the series; regardless of the motives for postponing it, there's an inevitable sense of defeatism in the air.

Yeah. While it doesn't necessarily mean that Sony is unhappy with CASINO ROYALE, it very well could. It's quite possible that Sony is getting cold feet. On the other hand, it might just be due to not being able to meet the tight production schedule.

It's hard to say what this really means, but as you say, some of that bold confidence that came with a summer release is gone.

[K1Bond007]

That summer would be a mistake.

I agree. It could have done okay, but I think it wouldn't have been as successful. Bond has been doing great in the fall/November, why change?

[Harmsway]

As others have alluded to, I think the bottom line is that SONY looked at some of the competition and got spooked, which is a sad statement about the current stock of Bond in the United States. Bond would've been up against The Dark Knight, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, HALO, and Iron Man (though I'm not sure how much of a challenge Iron Man will really put up).

Yeah. I think that's probably the most likely scenario. I'm not sure BOND 22 would hold up all that well in a summer slot, myself, and that's ultimately going to be a killer summer.

What's really telling, though, is not that they moved the film out of summer, but that they moved it to the first week of November, a sure sign that they DO NOT want to get lost or challenged by other holiday movies that come in 2 weeks later and play through Christmas.

Yeah. It's one of the safest slots there is.

[Johnboy007]

And though I'm definitely pro-CASINO ROYALE, I think it's also possible that they also want a little bit of time to be able to evaluate things following CASINO ROYALE's release.

As I said before, the two year time slot is the more realistic option. 18 months was pushing it. However, if SONY really wanted to make it happen, they could still be making this film with a May 2008 goal in mind and they could get it done. This has, I would say, almost NOTHING to do with Michell. For a man who was never hired to direct the film, it's a bit of a stretch to assume that his leaving a project he was never officialy involved with, could simply derail the process to such a degree. If his involvement was that critical, then SONY could've made up the time difference by moving the film back mid June or early July.

I mean, honestly, EON and SONY have got to stop being afraid of the American audience and, instead, start getting out there and challenging these other films. EON can't keep living in the shadows. There's no point in making a movie if you can't feel alive.

Having the film kick off Summer 2008 was a nice touch (it allowed SONY to "make a statement", put Bond back in Summer, and still avoid the biggest of the competitors by a few weeks), but by putting it in the first week of November, what they've really said is that they're still unsure of what they've got.

Yeah. It's one of the safest slots there is.

Yeah, but still, it's frought with obstacles and challenges. By making that move, SONY all but gives up marketshare after Thanksgiving, essentially conceding the rest of the Holiday season to the other films. That means Bond22 has to make most of its money the first and second weekends of November, because after that the other major movies will debut, and Bond22 will be considered an also-ran by that time.

Agreed about Eon's trepidation of a summer release. It's been 17 years since they've put out a real financial turkey (couldn't resist a turkey joke). Perhaps they just want to play it safe[r] with Bond22 after the risks they've taken with Casino Royale.

[Harmsway]

Perhaps they just want to play it safe[r] with Bond22 after the risks involved with Casino Royale.

Well, yeah. I think that's a given. I don't think there'd be much trepidation about a summer Bond film if CASINO ROYALE wasn't so damned risky and controversial.

[Loomis]

It's hardly a big deal that we'll have to wait a few extra months to see BOND 22, but, still, I'd really love Bond to be summer fare again - heck, just once would be enough. Also, the recent official announcement of a May release for 22 seemed to show huge confidence in the series; regardless of the motives for postponing it, there's an inevitable sense of defeatism in the air.

Really, Loomis? Defeatism?

Not here at Commander Bond though - or is this something you ARE sensing here or from some other source?

Regards

No, all I'm saying is that the apparent huge vote of confidence by Sony and Eon in their own product that was the recent official announcement of BOND 22 is now null and void. What's left is.... well, nothing. I do appreciate that they're not calling the whole thing off, but there's still a sense of letdown. I have no "sources" to suggest defeatism at Sony/Eon.

[Johnboy007]

In the end, does an extra six months of waiting really matter?

[Harmsway]

In the end, does an extra six months of waiting really matter?

No, but we Bond fans do have to discuss something...

[Loomis]

The article listed the new date as Nov 7th, which doesn't seem quite right to me. All of the Nov releases have been the Friday before Thanksgiving. Thish also lets them take advantage of the big holiday Weekend (Wed-Sun) for its second week of release, which insures a healthy start.

This makes me wonder if the article is complete correct.

I'd trust The Hollywood Reporter. They've been reliable.

Hmmm...I'm sorry to see that they've pulled out of Summer'08; I had felt that the summer time slot was THE DEFINITIVE STATEMENT of support for Craig, and now I'm not so sure. I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with Roger Michell pulling out of the project; he was never officially hired to begin with, so his impact on the production had to be close to nil. Also, as has been often mentioned before, these aren't showcases for directors. All they need is a good utility man who'll take orders from Barbara and Michael. I'd be more concerned about script issues than whether Michell was coming on board or not. And considering how EON pulled the trigger on TND without a script being ready, I can't really see that as being an issue either.

I totally agree. Even with Eon's apparent unwillingness to hire directors other than 50-year-old Oxbridge grad and BBC alumnus Hugh Blitherington-Featherstonehaugh (minor Hollywood successes in 1996 with HUNTED TO KILL, starring Ray Liotta, and in 2001 with RED CORNER 2: THE RETRIAL, starring Richard Gere, followed by more mindblowingly self-important guff for the Beeb), directors are ten are penny. I'm sure Michell could have easily been replaced without disrupting the original schedule. Perhaps for "We need a new director", we should read "The script isn't even remotely ready"?

I mean, honestly, EON and SONY have got to stop being afraid of the American audience and, instead, start getting out there and challenging these other films. EON can't keep living in the shadows. There's no point in making a movie if you can't feel alive.

Having the film kick off Summer 2008 was a nice touch (it allowed SONY to "make a statement", put Bond back in Summer, and still avoid the biggest of the competitors by a few weeks), but by putting it in the first week of November, what they've really said is that they're still unsure of what they've got.

Yeah, even if you believe the ludicrous view that the presence of other franchises in cinemas around the same time automatically means a humiliating public death for Bond, I gather that THE DARK KNIGHT would have opened about a couple of weeks after BOND 22.

Fear of the summer, fear of American audiences.... pathetic.

[JimmyBond]

I'm sure Michell could have easily been replaced without disrupting the original schedule. Perhaps for "We need a new director", we should read "The script isn't even remotely ready"?

That's probably closest to the actual truth. With CR having the great script that it does (you'll just have to trust me on this ), perhaps the producers feel a greater pressure to produce another "A" quality script with the next film. Which could explain why Purvis and Wade are apparently out of the picture (after all that talk of them working on the next script).

Here's my (rather vague) prediction: Purvis and Wade are gone, EON has a premise they're trying to get turned into a script, but it's harder than they thought it'd be.

[dinovelvet]

[quote name='Harmsway' post='598672' date='1 September 2006 - 11:07']
[quote name='Gravity's Silhouette' post='598668' date='1 September 2006 - 12:00']
As others have alluded to, I think the bottom line is that SONY looked at some of the competition and got spooked, which is a sad statement about the current stock of Bond in the United States. Bond would've been up against The Dark Knight, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, HALO, and Iron Man (though I'm not sure how much of a challenge Iron Man will really put up).[/quote]
Yeah. I think that's probably the most likely scenario. I'm not sure BOND 22 would hold up all that well in a summer slot, myself, and that's ultimately going to be a killer summer.
[/quote]

I disagree...its not like they dropped Bond 22 right in the middle of a Batman/Narnia sandwich, they put it up front in May in the 'first movie of summer' schedule. It would have made the majority of its money before any of the big guns weigh in 2-3 weeks later around Memorial Day. It was the luxury of a summer release date without having to contend with any juggernauts. We don't really know enough about Iron Man to say whether or not it would be a serious challenge, but given the director and the darker tone of the character (darker Marvel characters do less well at the box office, e.g. Daredevil, The Punisher, Blade), we're probably talking Constantine/V for Vendetta numbers rather than Spider-man or X-Men. Bottom line, there was just simply not enough competition around to warrant the 'they backed out because of competition' excuse.

[quote][quote name='Gravity's Silhouette' date='1 September 2006 - 11:05' And considering how EON pulled the trigger on TND without a script being ready, I can't really see that as being an issue either.
[/quote]

Perhaps they don't want to repeat that mistake where the budget balloons out of control and they find themselves rewriting the script months into the shooting schedule?

[Double-Oh-Zero]

I mean, honestly, EON and SONY have got to stop being afraid of the American audience and, instead, start getting out there and challenging these other films. EON can't keep living in the shadows. There's no point in making a movie if you can't feel alive.

Having the film kick off Summer 2008 was a nice touch (it allowed SONY to "make a statement", put Bond back in Summer, and still avoid the biggest of the competitors by a few weeks), but by putting it in the first week of November, what they've really said is that they're still unsure of what they've got.

Yeah, even if you believe the ludicrous view that the presence of other franchises in cinemas around the same time automatically means a humiliating public death for Bond, I gather that THE DARK KNIGHT would have opened about a couple of weeks after BOND 22.

Fear of the summer, fear of American audiences.... pathetic.

Is it really pathetic? Or is it just a matter of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in terms of the release date? I don't think they're "afraid" of American audiences or releasing Bond 22 in the summer, they're just deciding to go with what has worked for the past ten years. But don't think that I'm trying to adhere to the view that the big summer blockbusters will rape Bond at the box office, however; DAD opened around the same time as Potter and LOTR and managed fine, so I don't think that's the issue here. I'm sure that they'll change the release date to summer if they found that a fall release date isn't working as well as it has been for subsequent films.

Then again, it could indeed be that the script is nowhere near ready for a summer release date, or a problem with the director, or a scheduling conflict with Craig.

[Santa]

I imagine something like that is behind it. They already knew statistics about summer vs autumn releases and what else is around then, it's not like that is news, so something must have happened to make them change the decision.

[Loomis]

I mean, honestly, EON and SONY have got to stop being afraid of the American audience and, instead, start getting out there and challenging these other films. EON can't keep living in the shadows. There's no point in making a movie if you can't feel alive.

Having the film kick off Summer 2008 was a nice touch (it allowed SONY to "make a statement", put Bond back in Summer, and still avoid the biggest of the competitors by a few weeks), but by putting it in the first week of November, what they've really said is that they're still unsure of what they've got.

Yeah, even if you believe the ludicrous view that the presence of other franchises in cinemas around the same time automatically means a humiliating public death for Bond, I gather that THE DARK KNIGHT would have opened about a couple of weeks after BOND 22.

Fear of the summer, fear of American audiences.... pathetic.

Is it really pathetic? Or is it just a matter of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in terms of the release date?

Oh, I don't know, I'm just being fanboyish. But I would like a summer Bond, just once.

I'm sick of going to a new 007 flick in the freezing bloody cold. Winter should be for sitting by the fireside with the new Bond movie freshly released on DVD and fished out of the Christmas stocking.

[Santa]

I mean, honestly, EON and SONY have got to stop being afraid of the American audience and, instead, start getting out there and challenging these other films. EON can't keep living in the shadows. There's no point in making a movie if you can't feel alive.

Having the film kick off Summer 2008 was a nice touch (it allowed SONY to "make a statement", put Bond back in Summer, and still avoid the biggest of the competitors by a few weeks), but by putting it in the first week of November, what they've really said is that they're still unsure of what they've got.

Yeah, even if you believe the ludicrous view that the presence of other franchises in cinemas around the same time automatically means a humiliating public death for Bond, I gather that THE DARK KNIGHT would have opened about a couple of weeks after BOND 22.

Fear of the summer, fear of American audiences.... pathetic.

Is it really pathetic? Or is it just a matter of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in terms of the release date?

Oh, I don't know, I'm just being fanboyish. But I would like a summer Bond, just once.

I'm sick of going to a new 007 flick in the freezing bloody cold. Winter should be for sitting by the fireside with the new Bond movie freshly released on DVD and fished out of the Christmas stocking.

And surely summer should be about barbecues and beach parties, not sitting in a dark room watching a big screen?

[dinovelvet]

I imagine something like that is behind it. They already knew statistics about summer vs autumn releases and what else is around then, it's not like that is news, so something must have happened to make them change the decision.

Exactly. No other movies have moved in on the May date since the announcement, and unlike many people in this thread, I'm sure they did the requisite research and marketplace trends analysis when announcing the date. I find it highly unlikely that somebody at Sony suddenly noticed that Iron Man and whatever else were opening at around the same time and nobody had previously been aware of it

[Santa]

I will now pointlessly speculate in the style of many on this forum: They've hired a new director, for whom the May release date would cause scheduling errors. This is what has happened and it will be announced soon. Maybe tomorrow.

[DLibrasnow]

In the end, does an extra six months of waiting really matter?

I'll pose that question back at you in May 2008

[Johnboy007]

In the end, does an extra six months of waiting really matter?

I'll pose that question back at you in May 2008

Six months is like a blink of an eye compared to four years to me.

[zencat]

I agree, Gravity's Silhouette. I don't think this is anything other than exactly as it appears. It looked as if Michell was onboard so they were able to project May '08. When Michell dropped out, they needed to allow time to find a new director and that naturally pushed the schedule and the movie to the next viable movie season; Fall.

[I never miss]

Perhaps everybody at Sony and Eon got a little carried away and became over-confident for a few weeks. Perhaps they have ditched the original premise of the screenplay that MGW was working on - perhaps Roger Mitchell left because he thought the story was poor, prompting Eon to ditch it or have a major re-think on it. Perhaps, upon viweing a rough-cut of CR Eon realise that it is set to be so fantastic that they couldn't possibly produce a worthy sequel script in such a short time frame. Hence, they have given themselves a few extra months to come up with a CR-standard script. Perhaps Craig (whose opinion I'm sure they'd listen to) didn't rate the Bond 22 storyline that MGW had come up with?

Who knows. One thing is for sure though, I'd rather P&W and MGW did not write any more Bond scripts. We deserve scripts of the calibre of FRWL/GF/TB and OHMSS.

[Publius]

This is unfortunate. Hailing from the Sunshine State, I don't mind going to the theaters in November because of the weather, but as a movie buff I've always loved the summer blockbuster experience, and simply want Bond to finally be a part of that during my adult lifetime.

Anyway, I doubt this signifies a lack of confidence, considering they stopped filming and then announced the May '08 date a few whole weeks ago. A delayed about-face might seem to signal weakness, but if that's so why would Sony bother jumping the gun in the first place and send such a message of strength?

More likely, I think they just realized things weren't shaping up fast enough for their liking, so decided to stick with the traditional every-other-year fall-release schedule, which will also give them more time. Maybe they want to part ways with P&W, but can't keep Haggis on board, either. Or something else. Who knows. (Whatever it is, I can only hope it does involve P&W being dumped.)