113 replies to this topic

[singleentendre]

^Yes, something exactly like that. The biggest challenge would be making the plot fit in a modern context when it's just screaming Cold War. Like you said, nukes are so last century. I think maybe a biological attack of some kind might actually work.

Combine the plot of Moonraker with a less science fiction version of Everything or Nothing's nanobots (something more organic, a virus maybe) and you could have a good movie. Or maybe you have a cheesy throwback to the Brosnan era. It could go either way.

[Bryce (003)]

Regardless of story, the timing bugs me.

I was just really hoping for a 2010 release and then having 2012 for B24 and the little matter of the um...

50th ANNIVERSARY OF THE FILM SERIES!

Sorry, just um..sort of...Bugs me.

[blueman]

^ They'll do that for a big DVD push, make more money that way. No worries.

[CaptainPower]

^ They'll do that for a big DVD push, make more money that way. No worries.

Oh thank Goodness! Was worried there for a second

[mister-white]

If it's 2011 could they do it in like early May, then start work asap for the next one after that, which could make it in time for October 2012 (the exact 50th anniversary).

But why do I have a feeling that what Eon is planning may differ from what MGM is planning. Could they be making the film for a end of 2011 release but the studio doesn't release it until summer (or fall) 2012. Just look at what happened to the latest Star Trek, Abrams had it done for December 2008, but Paramount didn't release it until May 2009 (and the box office numbers stand behind that decision).

[Quantumofsolace007]

I just want 5 solid bond films with Craig.



However I also would like a private jet and the following actresses
amanda bynes
hilary duff
and small screen actress Danielle Fishel


We'll see which comes first

[double o ego]

No big deal. 2009 is half over, 2010 will go buy in a flash. And by Jan 2011 we'll be into filming, details. It's one year, really.

it could be summer 2011 why are we all assuming fall 2011?

I don't care what anyone says, Bond being released in the summer of 2011 is ridiculous. They'd stand to make more money in the autumn. Batman 3, spider-man 4, other comic book movies such as captain america, thor, probably transformers 3, harry potter, possible 4th Bourne movie and many others.

[Quantumofsolace007]

No big deal. 2009 is half over, 2010 will go buy in a flash. And by Jan 2011 we'll be into filming, details. It's one year, really.

it could be summer 2011 why are we all assuming fall 2011?

I don't care what anyone says, Bond being released in the summer of 2011 is ridiculous. They'd stand to make more money in the autumn. Batman 3, spider-man 4, other comic book movies such as captain america, thor, probably transformers 3, harry potter, possible 4th Bourne movie and many others.

and i don't care what anyone says Bond could make just as much money in the winter/spring of 2011 as the could in the fall of 2011.


If anoyne can tell me what big movie bond would be going up against in Fabuary or March or April I'd love to know.

[tdalton]

But I think we had a film called YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE that was released in cinemas in 1967 and starred an actor called Sean Connery in the main role...? So - unless we want to sound the death bells for the series, we do not start remaking old films. And Eon are not in the business of that anyway.

EON has been in the business of remaking their own films a couple of times already. TSWLM and TND are, more or less, remakes of their version of YOLT (and AVTAK is a remake of GF), which itself has absolutely nothing to do with Fleming's novel outside of the names of characters. The other 1967 Bond film actually has more in common with its source novel than EON's YOLT did, and they went ahead and "remade" that film for the big screen already, which leads me to see the presence of 1967's "You Only Live Twice" as no obstacle to a new film being called the same. If EON were to make a true adaptation of the novel (or even an adaptation in the same style as their semi-adaptation of CASINO ROYALE), then the only things the films would have in common would be their titles, and I certainly wouldn't consider the second film to be a remake of the awful first one.

I actually don't see how an adaptation of Fleming's YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE could not carry its actual title. It's a fantastic title that is really the only one that could fit that story. As cool as SHATTERHAND (which I'm assuming, based on reading these boards, would be the choice title for an adaptation of YOLT) would be, it doesn't hold anywhere near the kind of meaning that YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE does within the context of that storyline.

[DamnCoffee]

I seem to remember Lewis Gilbert saying that with a Bond movie, you have to do with same thing but different. That's the approach he took with You Only Live Twice, The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker, and if you watch either of the three, the similarities are screaming out.

You Only Live Twice is a remake of Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me is a remake of You Only Live Twice and Moonraker is a remake of The Spy Who Loved Me.

[Tybre]

No big deal. 2009 is half over, 2010 will go buy in a flash. And by Jan 2011 we'll be into filming, details. It's one year, really.

it could be summer 2011 why are we all assuming fall 2011?

Summer would be suicidal. Captain America is set for 2011; Marvel intends to buy into the July 4 gimmick last I heard. Thor is rumored to be summer 2011 (though doubtful). Green Lantern is planned summer 2011, though it's dragging its feet. They're planning for the next Batman to be out in 2011, which would be another summer. Warner wants a Superman reboot in 2011 and Brandon Routh has gone on record saying he expected to start shooting in early 09 (no word on if they have yet). The people behind Star Trek are saying they want the next one out by 2011 if they can manage it. Two more summer blockbusters there. X-Men Origins: Magneto is planned for summer 2011. Iron Man 2 is also planned for summer 2011. I can go on. The point is, 2011 is going to be big if the studios get their wish. I say hold off on Bond 23 until fall because then not only will it fare better in the box office, but we can end 2011 with a bang.

[tdalton]

I agree that a Summer release (regardless of the year) would not be a good thing for a Bond film. There's too much competition during the summer, which would lead to lower box office returns than what they would be able to achieve in the fall, when there's little to no competition.

[Tybre]

I agree that a Summer release (regardless of the year) would not be a good thing for a Bond film. There's too much competition during the summer, which would lead to lower box office returns than what they would be able to achieve in the fall, when there's little to no competition.

Indeed. Summer is primarily action. Fall is primarily romance and drama. Autumn is the ideal time of year to release an action film if you're not someone like Warner, who wants to cash in on the summer blockbuster.

[Quantumofsolace007]

and spring is ? is there some unwritten rule bond 23 can't come out in march?

[Tybre]

and spring is ? is there some unwritten rule bond 23 can't come out in march?

Spring wouldn't be a bad time either, but it wouldn't be optimum. April/May see the beginnings of the summer blockbusters. March kind of catches the tail-end of some of the winter action/drama flicks. Spring is good, but not optimum. By releasing a Bond film at a time when the genre is virtually null you assure a bigger box office. And in the end that's what it real boils down to. Money. Without money there can be no Bond.

[001carus]

My goodness there are some ridiculous opinions flying around here. We can only be thankful for a 2011 release. Who wants a rushed film sooner than a film READY for release in 2011? What's the good in having '5 Craig films' if only a few of them are good? Would you not rather have 4 fantastic Craig films?

No, they're not scared or running out of source material. No, they're not tired or sick of Bond. They're following a NORMAL cycle for releasing a sequel. The Empire Strikes Back - 3 years later. The Dark Knight - 3 years later. The Godfather Part 2 - almost 3 years later. Arguably the best sequels of all time do this. It's simply HOW you put out good films. Yes, we got QOS within 2 years, and while I love the living daylights out of it, many argue it was rushed, which I can partly agree upon.

This is not EON giving up, getting tired, running out of source material, getting lazy. Do not worry - this is the best possible start for Bond 23 it could receive. Give them some goddamn breathing room and let them make a fantastic movie.

[Zorin Industries]

Why shouldn't a Bond film emerge in the Summer months? I love the complete lack of faith CBN fans seem to have in the Bond brand. People go to the cinema more than once you know....

[DamnCoffee]

Exactly. If the film's good, it's good. People will go and see it regardless of what else is on.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Why shouldn't a Bond film emerge in the Summer months? I love the complete lack of faith CBN fans seem to have in the Bond brand. People go to the cinema more than once you know....

Sure, but I'm kind of tired of most of the biggest movies being released during the summer month, which is the main reason I prefer 007 to stay with his autumn-releases.

[double o ego]

Why shouldn't a Bond film emerge in the Summer months? I love the complete lack of faith CBN fans seem to have in the Bond brand. People go to the cinema more than once you know....

Please, not everyone is a die hard Bond fan and who's to say people wouldn't rather watch competitive films more than once? Also, take into account not everyone's got money to burn, especially duing a highly competitive season in this economic climate. As others have said, there is little to no competition in the autumn. Why release the movie a few months earlier with the rest of the lions when they can wait a bit and get greater BO returns? It's just not smart to release Bond in the summer right about now.

Exactly. If the film's good, it's good. People will go and see it regardless of what else is on.

Because money is what counts the most, more than anything to the studio/prducers. It's a much more sound and effective investment to release Bond films in the autumn than in the summer; if you extrapolate the logistics of releasing Bond films for nearly 50 years, it'll be lunacy to stray from such an obviously and marketable tactic.

[Tybre]

Why shouldn't a Bond film emerge in the Summer months? I love the complete lack of faith CBN fans seem to have in the Bond brand. People go to the cinema more than once you know....

Please, not everyone is a die hard Bond fan and who's to say people wouldn't rather watch competitive films more than once? Also, take into account not everyone's got money to burn, especially duing a highly competitive season in this economic climate. As others have said, there is little to no competition in the autumn. Why release the movie a few months earlier with the rest of the lions when they can wait a bit and get greater BO returns? It's just not smart to release Bond in the summer right about now.

Exactly. If the film's good, it's good. People will go and see it regardless of what else is on.

Because money is what counts the most, more than anything to the studio/prducers. It's a much more sound and effective investment to release Bond films in the autumn than in the summer; if you extrapolate the logistics of releasing Bond films for nearly 50 years, it'll be lunacy to stray from such an obviously and marketable tactic.

If this chart has any merit to it, the numbers speak for themselves:
http://www.klast.net/bond/boxoff.html

[Quantumofsolace007]

Nop one has given me a convincing reason for why March is a bad month for bond films. It's starting to warm up a bit you don't have the cheesy romance film that tie into valentines day. I mean it's an untapped markert.

Yet the best is "well we should relase bond after the summer blokc busters." Uhm Why? Even April or Early May would work Kick of summer with 007 It not only can work it will.

even Febuary could work "this valentines day BOND with you loved one"

I'm telling you january - May is as untouched as September - december.

[Tybre]

Nop one has given me a convincing reason for why March is a bad month for bond films. It's starting to warm up a bit you don't have the cheesy romance film that tie into valentines day. I mean it's an untapped markert.

Yet the best is "well we should relase bond after the summer blokc busters." Uhm Why? Even April or Early May would work Kick of summer with 007 It not only can work it will.

even Febuary could work "this valentines day BOND with you loved one"

I'm telling you january - May is as untouched as September - december.

If we're doing early I would say jan to march, maybe april. May cuts it a little close. As I recall most if not all X-Men films were May. The recent Star Trek film was May. May is the beginning of the blockbuster season. May cuts it too close.

[Zorin Industries]

Why shouldn't a Bond film emerge in the Summer months? I love the complete lack of faith CBN fans seem to have in the Bond brand. People go to the cinema more than once you know....

Please, not everyone is a die hard Bond fan and who's to say people wouldn't rather watch competitive films more than once? Also, take into account not everyone's got money to burn, especially duing a highly competitive season in this economic climate. As others have said, there is little to no competition in the autumn. Why release the movie a few months earlier with the rest of the lions when they can wait a bit and get greater BO returns? It's just not smart to release Bond in the summer right about now.

Exactly. If the film's good, it's good. People will go and see it regardless of what else is on.

Because money is what counts the most, more than anything to the studio/prducers. It's a much more sound and effective investment to release Bond films in the autumn than in the summer; if you extrapolate the logistics of releasing Bond films for nearly 50 years, it'll be lunacy to stray from such an obviously and marketable tactic.

Bond films have a different audience to say the TERMINATORS, HARRY POTTERS and SPIDERMANS of this world. The longevity of the series means it has a wider spectatorship.

And the economic crisis actually means nothing. To be honest, history (and even 2008 box office receipts testify) shows that cinema as a whole and particularly James Bond 007 fare very well indeed during times of recession. Britain was particularly strapped for cash in the 1970's but look at Bond's box office there. Furthermore, Bond has waited until the Autumn and still met a Harry Potter or Tolkein epic - as it would in the Winter of 2011 and 2012. Added to that, the award wannabees start their rounds in the Autumn.

And thoughts about studios not wanting to dilute their audiences during the summer has a certain truth, but less so in the face of Bond. MGM need a hit. Releasing a Bond film full stop is a paramount concern for them (which may still facilitate a 2010 007 pic). |You claim it would be lunacy to not release a Bond film in the Autumn but until GOLDENEYE, a great many of the Bond films were indeed released over the Summer months.