4014 replies to this topic

[S K Y F A L L]

He hasn't turned down a one film contract yet has he? Just the two film deal, perhaps he'll do one more for a % or something.

[K1Bond007]

Frankly, if one has made about 38 millions already - what good would be a contract for another 68?  It all comes down to this: does Craig want to subject himself to another four to six years of a grueling schedule that takes most of a year of being in top shape, training every day, suffering through countless press junkets and premieres, while cementing that people only think of you in one role (which is acting-wise limited and will always remain so)?

 

That's part of the deal. If he was upset about being typecast he should have never accepted the role to begin with because it doesn't matter if he stops now, 2 films later or he had done it just after Casino Royale, he's James Bond now and forever. I don't think he's upset about this at all. He never really has. I think it's his age. This is an easy question at 38, it's completely different at 48.

 

I'll bet he signs a contract for 1 more with an option for another, but ultimately does just 1 more and walks. Personally, I'd want to do 1 more than Pierce Brosnan

[Thevan7F]

 

The BBC disagrees. http://www.bbc.com/n...b020b885361fc9

I'll take a fifth Craig outing no questions asked, but if he's had enough, Tom is my man. I guess all we can do is wait and see.

 

I wanted Daniel Craig to do a 5th & last time as 007.  If he goes, What happen if next does one & quit or get sacked & like the way with George Lazenby who did one then quit then Sean Connery came back for one more. Well Daniel Craig can't come back for Bond 26 as 007. Once he goes ,he can't come Back in Bond 26.Like his last 3 processors did including Pierce Brosnan who only 4 as well from 1995-2002 who Daniel Craig replaced 2006 with Casino Royale reboot. They have move with Bond 8 so get a good actor who more 1 or 2. Daniel Craig is my last Favourite Bond. After this I never be a Bond fan again. Only I read comics & Books. No more franchise Bond film for me after Daniel Craig. He was great.

[DaveBond21]

Being 25, I have only ever know Brosnan and Craig in the role - and as you rightly say we have had relatively quick decisions compared to previously within the franchise. However, I did not experience the waiting of previous eras... and I'm glad I didn't! 

 

Well, when I was 25, we got a Bond film every 2 years. You've seen less movies in your 25 years than I did in my first 25 years.

 

There was only the 6 year gap from 89-95.

[SecretAgentFan]

I doubt that the BBC report is more than damage control.

 

EON will definitely be checking out potential successors because Craig´s era already is going on for a decade and he is approaching his 50´s.  Of course they want to get ready for a new era to keep the franchise alive.

 

I also find it very likely that Craig has already told MGM that he will not return and that he turned down the big money offer.  

 

IMHO, while not officially confirmed, the decision has been made by Craig, and probably some of the nervous beancounters still want Craig back because an established Bond lends a certain box office stability.  But I don´t think that more money or even more creative control (is that even possible?) will lure him back.

 

Stating now that Daniel Craig has not reached a decision is also a pretty good tool for keeping any successor´s agent in check.  In fact, this "denial" by the BBC, for me, is even a bigger confirmation that a deal with Hiddleston is being worked on.

 

It´s strategy 101, folks.

 

Of course, Hiddleston´s agent will want big money for his client, especially for someone who - careerwise - does not need Bond, to be frank.  It is a question now whether Hiddleston WANTS Bond bad enough so he will take closer to what EON is willing to offer at this point.

 

Personally, I would love Craig to step down now and Hiddleston agreeing to a deal.  Because that would mean we could get a new Bond film next year.  Waiting for Craig would probably mean waiting for the next Bond film in 2-4 years.

[Dustin]

I suppose the BBC piece might also be about covering bases for MGM. No doubt having Craig potentially on board would be seen as a huge advantage by some studios. Look at it like this: without Craig any studio interested would effectively have to sign blindly without any clear idea what to expect they will get in return. But if he's no longer available - and I think he may have made that decision long ago, perhaps even before shooting SPECTRE - going with Mendes (established and by now a member of the 'family') and maybe Hiddleston (up-and-coming, already trusted with important parts and now also in the genre) is probably the next best thing. Unless a studio has already their very own candidate (and no studio exec in their right mind would try this against Eon) they will most likely accept the Eon package - provided the terms are acceptable.

[Jim]

BBC report would still come up as associating Mr Hiddleston with James Bond (which is not a bad idea) and as they have The Night Manager to shift in various distribution deals around the World, it'll probably help grease those wheels a bit. Everyone's a winner.

[Dustin]

Just so.

[Tiin007]

 

Personally, I would love Craig to step down now and Hiddleston agreeing to a deal.  Because that would mean we could get a new Bond film next year.

 

Do you mean 2017?

[sharpshooter]

He hasn't turned down a one film contract yet has he? Just the two film deal, perhaps he'll do one more for a % or something.

My hope is Craig does one more. There's still time to work something out.

[Surrie]

 

Being 25, I have only ever know Brosnan and Craig in the role - and as you rightly say we have had relatively quick decisions compared to previously within the franchise. However, I did not experience the waiting of previous eras... and I'm glad I didn't! 

 

Well, when I was 25, we got a Bond film every 2 years. You've seen less movies in your 25 years than I did in my first 25 years.

 

There was only the 6 year gap from 89-95.

 

 

This is true. However, I was only alive for 5 years of the 6-year hiatus... and at that point in my life I didn't know of Bonds existence - ha! The first film I saw was GoldenEye and from there (Brosnan's era) we did have a fairly good flow of films, and then with the Craig era too. This is despite the lengthier gaps between films now. I feel at least we knew to expect another.

[Dustin]

Personally, I would love Craig to step down now and Hiddleston agreeing to a deal. Because that would mean we could get a new Bond film next year.

Do you mean 2017?

Would that be hypothetically possible, provided that MGM settles on a deal soon, within the next month or two? Personally I think 2018 is more likely. But whoever is going to handle the distribution side would want to see their invested money working fast. Once they can agree on somewhat realistic terms for sharing profits and shouldering the finances of future productions things could move much smoother.

[Tiin007]

 

 

Personally, I would love Craig to step down now and Hiddleston agreeing to a deal. Because that would mean we could get a new Bond film next year.

Do you mean 2017?

Would that be hypothetically possible, provided that MGM settles on a deal soon, within the next month or two? Personally I think 2018 is more likely. But whoever is going to handle the distribution side would want to see their invested money working fast. Once they can agree on somewhat realistic terms for sharing profits and shouldering the finances of future productions things could move much smoother.

 

 

Unless they've made significant progress with a script (one which could accommodate a new Bond), I'd imagine 2017 being a bit too soon at this point. Summer 2018 seems like the earliest we can reasonably get Bond 25, and even that might be pushing it.

 

Granted, if EON are significantly further along in development than we realize (script, distribution deal, possible directors, etc...), then I suppose 2017 is possible. Just doesn't seem likely to me.

 

Regardless, if the gap between SP and Bond 25 is shorter than the gap between SF and SP, it will be very odd. Especially as the last two turnovers of Bond actor had meant longer waits.  

[Guy Haines]

Post on a page of the BBC website today stated that Daniel Craig had not decided one way or the other about whether he will appear in the next Bond film. It would appear that we've had yet another round of tabloid speculation about his future this week, 68 millions worth of it in fact! ;-)

[Orion]

Post on a page of the BBC website today stated that Daniel Craig had not decided one way or the other about whether he will appear in the next Bond film. It would appear that we've had yet another round of tabloid speculation about his future this week, 68 millions worth of it in fact! ;-)

This has been disregarded by this forum for some reason. They consider the Daily Mail (where this story of 68 million ACTUALLY came from) more reliable than the BBC for some reason. I believe I speak for all the brits here when I say:  

[Dustin]

Post on a page of the BBC website today stated that Daniel Craig had not decided one way or the other about whether he will appear in the next Bond film. It would appear that we've had yet another round of tabloid speculation about his future this week, 68 millions worth of it in fact! ;-)

This has been disregarded by this forum for some reason. They consider the Daily Mail (where this story of 68 million ACTUALLY came from) more reliable than the BBC for some reason. I believe I speak for all the brits here when I say:

Actually, if you care to read the last two pages you will find that the BBC piece in fact was mentioned; just not with the desired result. Sorry about that.

[univex]

http://news.tvguide....afta-interview/

 

Is there any truth to the rumours that you got flown out to L.A. for meetings about James Bond?

AT: *mumbles* “No, it’s just rumours. I don’t know anything about it.”

 

Would you like to do it?

AT: *silence*

 

Silence, then. Hum... 

Him or Hiddleston. I would be one happy fan. 

http://www.haberlega...mes bond(1).jpg

https://pbs.twimg.co...OnVXAAAUlRV.jpg

[TheREAL008]

Too much speculation and not enough fact.

1. I highly doubt EON would offer Daniel 99 million to stay, considering that would hearken back to 1970/71 of sorts. I think they learned their lesson about that 

2. Perhaps Daniel has just one more in him? I'm fine with that. I'd want to see him tie with Sir Sean but sadly that won't happen. For me at this point I'll assume Daniel's official stance is simply "uncertain" and wait for an official word.

3. Don't bring back Bronsan, and Idris Elba himself once stated that he wasn't interested in the role.

[plankattack]

Too much speculation and not enough fact.

1. I highly doubt EON would offer Daniel 99 million to stay, considering that would hearken back to 1970/71 of sorts. I think they learned their lesson about that

Exactly. That number alone makes all this tabloid rumour-mongering and nothing more. There's no way that, without a studio deal sorted, that anyone is offering anyone anywhere at anytime, that kind of cash.

"Next Bond James Bond is...." is go-to Fleet Street hack editor fodder on a slow news-day and no-one is interested in Ronaldo-back-to-Man-Utd filling up the column inches. Internet trolling.

[SecretAgentFan]

The number seems very likely.  Mind you, it does not mean: here´s the cash, now do it.  It means: this is about what you will have received after your work on two movies is done, and the cash is only one part of it, the second, bigger part is endorsement deals.

[Zen Razor]

If Connery ends up in a film with Craig it will kill the entire storyline completely and make the whole James Bond being a codename theory true and that would just suck, James Bond is ONE guy he isn't different guys with one name that would open up SO much plot holes and most likely destroy the franchise.

I'm still not sure on the whole idea that Craig might leave yet, if he does that fine, it surely isn't the end. Bond has seen different lead roles for years and all have been great to date, I think Hiddleston, Henry Cavill or Michael Fassbender at this point are the best choices, I'm sure Michael and Barbara will make a great casting choice as always they did do it with Craig I don't see why they can't do it again not to mention they still are great at casting support cast members as well. I just really hope Bond doesn't get a very dull and boring actor that just doesn't commit to the role. If Craig can do one more on the other hand the fans would definitely appreciate it, Get Christoph Waltz as well.

[Harmsway]

The number seems very likely. Mind you, it does not mean: here´s the cash, now do it. It means: this is about what you will have received after your work on two movies is done, and the cash is only one part of it, the second, bigger part is endorsement deals.

Yep.

The number fits with Hollywood trends. Downey Jr is getting more than that from Disney/Marvel!

[Odd Jobbies]

When i first saw this rumour (£68m) i said it was likely false as i can't see any actor turning that figure down.  But i hadn't realised it was for a  2-movie contract. Now, given his protestations i really can't see Craig signing away the next 7ish years, until in his early-mid 50s whatever the figure.  One movie, sure, but not 2...

 

If the rumour is true then it shows how much they want to keep Craig on bored (and wisely so). In which case it's inevitable they'll be another offer for one more movie instead of two. Could be that they have a 3-movie story arc for Craig vs. Waltz to play out. But the main reason for the 2-movie contract is undoubtedly to sweeten the new studio deal.

 

Btw, there's a nice little list of candidates:

 

The Next James Bond: 11 Actors Who Should Play 007

 

Nothing new here. There's the glaring omission of Rupert Friend, their Harry Potter candidate is way off target, whilst others are plain silly, but it's a handy round up.

 

It reminded me that although Hiddleston is flavour of the month, it's Dan Stevens that has by far made the best public audition with the thriller The Guest.

[FlemingBond]

on the one hand i wanted Craig to do at least 5. On the other i didn't like SPECTRE, and i'm pretty sure if he does another it will rip off OHMSS , which i'm not interested in seeing. I don't think they have any ideas left.

[Royal Dalton]

Quite. The series needs a rest and a rethink.

[Single-O-Seven]

Quite. The series needs a rest and a rethink.

It's not such a hard problem in my eyes. They seem too eager to get bigger and bolder and to throw more money at the problem of how to do that. If they scaled back and put more effort into story and characters, with one or two atmospheric locations instead of endless globe-hopping, I think the films would still do very well and the pressure involved in making them could be lessened. If Craig was given a rich story with half the action and physical requirements, and a shooting schedule a few months shorter, he might find it more appealing, as would Bond #7 in the long run.

[S K Y F A L L]

Craig's series has been riddled with these constant delays, writers strikes, lawsuits, contract negotiations, distribution deals, etc.

Almost as if EON is on some kind of anti fan campaign, sure it is not all their falt but they are not handling it well.

 

I would like at least one more Craig film and he'll do it cause of the MONEY!

Sure he'll act like he needs a script first but whose he kidding? 

 

Every 3-4 years means they'll be less likely to do anything different or simplified. Ugh.

Moore's series should be the ultimate goal, 7 films about every 2 years.

 

Almost every other franchise has it's actors in more then four films. What is this amateur hour?

[sharpshooter]

on the one hand i wanted Craig to do at least 5. On the other i didn't like SPECTRE, and i'm pretty sure if he does another it will rip off OHMSS , which i'm not interested in seeing. I don't think they have any ideas left.

A fan-made poster on here really excited me about Bond 25 being 'The Death Collector'. I think there's ways to bring the Craig era to close without going down the cliched routes. Ending things with a shake-up to the system that Casino Royale felt like at the time. 

[Professor Pi]

I'm still hoping for one more with Craig...never say never.  Still, $99M for two is more than the $40M RJD got for Captain America Civil War.  Not like Craig has other successful franchises.  Maybe they can sweeten the pot by funding a project or two he's interested in ...

 

Since 1999, the gaps have symmetrically been 3 years, 4, 2, 4 and 3 again.  I think we'll have to wait at least 3 years ...

 

Hiddleston will be busy with Thor: Ragnarok.  So either way ... November 2018.

[Mr. Somerset]

I certainly root for one more with Daniel before I'd want another actor in the role. I felt the same about Pierce in 2004. The last time we had a 5th outing was 35 years ago. These longer gaps really do deprive fans of additional adventures. Tim could've had 4, Pierce 5 and Daniel would be on his 6th outing now. With 3-4 year gaps becoming the rule, it increases the chance of the series fading out an makes it almost certain we'll never again have an actor in 6-7 films. Cubby wanted Tim to stick around after the 6 year gap and had hope he'd agree to 5 or 6 films, hence Dalton walking away from GE.

I'm not too thrilled about any of the candidates either-although Hiddleston might be okay. I'm looking at DR NO as I write this I'm thinking in 2016 there is CLEARLY no one quite like Sean.