1025 replies to this topic

[Germanlady]

I think, this doesn´t sound too bad.

Spyglass Beating Summit To Run MGM?
http://www.deadline....mgm/#more-48415

[Captain Tightpants]

this is why I should just stick to talking about project that it's OK to be excited about

It's okay to be excited about the 'new adventure' ... it's just that you need to stay in touch with reality a little. The MGM issue is a complex one, and not something that will be resolved in a hurry. There has been no evidence to suggest BOND 23 has been green-lit for production, and no news site - respectable or otherwise - has run anything on it. Quite the opposite, actually; Craig has been linked to the lead role in a Fincher-made adaptation of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO while he's under contract for Bond. And if you look at the image on 007.com advertising the 'new adventure', it is next to what appears to be a video game case.

We all want BOND 23 to happen, and as soon as possible - but the 'new adventure' isn't it.

[Automan]

this is why I should just stick to talking about project that it's OK to be excited about

It's okay to be excited about the 'new adventure' ... it's just that you need to stay in touch with reality a little. The MGM issue is a complex one, and not something that will be resolved in a hurry. There has been no evidence to suggest BOND 23 has been green-lit for production, and no news site - respectable or otherwise - has run anything on it. Quite the opposite, actually; Craig has been linked to the lead role in a Fincher-made adaptation of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO while he's under contract for Bond. And if you look at the image on 007.com advertising the 'new adventure', it is next to what appears to be a video game case.

We all want BOND 23 to happen, and as soon as possible - but the 'new adventure' isn't it.

thats right Craig is doing the Goldeneye game remake. I guess they need to franchise money, and withiout the Film and game, this would be a way to achieve it

[Captain Tightpants]

Actually, I believe most of the money comes from product placement and the box office. If a Bond film makes two hundred million dollars, that doesn't get split up and dropped into Babs' and MGW's bank accounts - it gets set aside for the next film.

[Zorin Industries]

Actually, I believe most of the money comes from product placement and the box office. If a Bond film makes two hundred million dollars, that doesn't get split up and dropped into Babs' and MGW's bank accounts - it gets set aside for the next film.

Not sure on that one...

[BoogieBond]

I think, this doesn´t sound too bad.

Spyglass Beating Summit To Run MGM?
http://www.deadline....mgm/#more-48415

Interesting. Does that mean if a decision is made by end of 2010, and things are resolved with the studio(s) by end 2011 that we may see bond in Nov 2012. Hopefully.
I guess EON are fortunate that Craig is still relatively young they have time, even if Bond 23 came out in 2013(with Craig at 44/45) its possible we may also get a 4th Craig Outing, as Brosnan was 49 wasn't he when DAD was released.

[double o ego]

Hmm, I have a very strong feeling Bond 23 will hit screens in 2 years if this MGM fiasco can be sorted before the winter.

[Zorin Industries]

Hmm, I have a very strong feeling Bond 23 will hit screens in 2 years if this MGM fiasco can be sorted before the winter.

".....If....."

[Captain Tightpants]

Actually, I believe most of the money comes from product placement and the box office. If a Bond film makes two hundred million dollars, that doesn't get split up and dropped into Babs' and MGW's bank accounts - it gets set aside for the next film.

Not sure on that one...

How else would a studio raise the hundreds of millions needed for a film's budget if they didn't recycle box office takings back into it? If Babs and MGW were simply taking all the money the film made, they'd be among the richest people in the world.

[Zorin Industries]

Actually, I believe most of the money comes from product placement and the box office. If a Bond film makes two hundred million dollars, that doesn't get split up and dropped into Babs' and MGW's bank accounts - it gets set aside for the next film.

Not sure on that one...

How else would a studio raise the hundreds of millions needed for a film's budget if they didn't recycle box office takings back into it? If Babs and MGW were simply taking all the money the film made, they'd be among the richest people in the world.

It's not as clear cut as the box office takings announced to the world all go back to the studio/s and hence the next Bond film. There are other parts to the equation - the box office of all global territories, the home market of all global territories, TV rights (cable, satellite, pay-per-view) as well as marketing rights etc etc. Remember - the likes of DR NO is still making money. And SOLACE certainly is.

And what 'monies' Bond HQ gets is complicated and not clear cut either.

[Germanlady]

Spyglass film studios favourite to win MGM deal

Both sides are said to be pushing to get a deal done before a waiver on MGM's debt expires in mid-July.

http://www.thisislon...for-mgm-role.do

[Simon]

And what 'monies' Bond HQ gets is complicated and not clear cut either.

Yeah, I've often wondered how the profits were divvied up.

I assumed if the ownership is a 50/50 split, that after production and marketing costs the profits would be shared likewise. I am sure this is a naive belief but in the absence of any other information, and let's not forget speculation(!), I wouldn't know where to begin.

And are sponsorship deals considered profit or just cost reductions? Which side of the balance sheet do they live on?

[Messervy]

But one also must take into account the distributor margin, the theaters' operators margin, etc. So it's not just production and marketing costs that you have to take off the profits.

As for product placement, it comes as production costs reduction.

[Harmsway]

Y'know, astonishingly, I don't think I really care whether or not BOND 23 ever comes to fruition. If, today, it was announced that EON had closed up shop, that the Bond franchise had reached its end, I would shrug and move on.

That general ambivalence probably best explains why most of my posts are in the "General Discussion" thread. I'm not too bothered about the future of Bond anymore, and while I'll still treasure the Bond novels and films of yore (or at least some of 'em), I feel, more or less, as though I've said what I have to say on that subject.

Time to move on, I suppose.

[Simon]

But one also must take into account the distributor margin, the theaters' operators margin, etc. So it's not just production and marketing costs that you have to take off the profits.

As for product placement, it comes as production costs reduction.

Sorry yes. I am sure there are multitudinous costs applicable to the grand equation.

'Prod and Mktg costs' was an attempt to encapsulate all costs as opposed to exclusively name All the costs...

[Matt_13]

These next couple of weeks will be interesting. Even if all of this gets sorted out I think it's pretty much a certainty that we won't see Bond until the end of the world in 2012. Mendes is locked up through next holiday and Craig has a full plate of differing jobs he's yet to tackle. Still, it will be nice to get things moving again, and hopefully get us some new blu rays.

[zencat]

Y'know, astonishingly, I don't think I really care whether or not BOND 23 ever comes to fruition. If, today, it was announced that EON had closed up shop, that the Bond franchise had reached its end, I would shrug and move on.

That general ambivalence probably best explains why most of my posts are in the "General Discussion" thread. I'm not too bothered about the future of Bond anymore, and while I'll still treasure the Bond novels and films of yore (or at least some of 'em), I feel, more or less, as though I've said what I have to say on that subject.

Time to move on, I suppose.

Hang in there Harmsway. I'm also feeling what you're feeling in regards to the films. My Bond book mania has never been stronger, but the movies...I don't know. So weird how this feels like the "gap" years all over again. As much as I love CR and Craig, there's something about this new hyper real approach that doesn't work for me. Not sure I want to "live" in that world, know what I mean? QOS certainly did not help. Again, very much how I felt after LTK. And back then the day did come that Eon "closed up shop" (put the franchise up for sale) and I did shrug and moved on. But then it came back and hit me right in that sweet spot and the mania flared right back up again. Indifference isn't such a bad attitude to hold during all this delay muck. But the price for Eon is they are now going to have to win me (us?) back.

[Messervy]

until the end of the world in 2012.

yes, I know we'll have French presidential elections in 2012, but to go as far as calling it the end of the world!...

[Messervy]

Y'know, astonishingly, I don't think I really care whether or not BOND 23 ever comes to fruition. If, today, it was announced that EON had closed up shop, that the Bond franchise had reached its end, I would shrug and move on.

That general ambivalence probably best explains why most of my posts are in the "General Discussion" thread. I'm not too bothered about the future of Bond anymore, and while I'll still treasure the Bond novels and films of yore (or at least some of 'em), I feel, more or less, as though I've said what I have to say on that subject.

Time to move on, I suppose.

Hang in there Harmsway. I'm also feeling what you're feeling in regards to the films. My Bond book mania has never been stronger, but the movies...I don't know. So weird how this feels like the "gap" years all over again. As much as I love CR and Craig, there's something about this new hyper real approach that doesn't work for me. Not sure I want to "live" in that world, know what I mean? QOS certainly did not help. Again, very much how I felt after LTK. And back then the day did come that Eon "closed up shop" (put the franchise up for sale) and I did shrug and moved on. But then it came back and hit me right in that sweet spot and the mania flared right back up again. Indifference isn't such a bad attitude to hold during all this delay muck. But the price for Eon is they are now going to have to win me (us?) back.

My feelings would more or less reflect both stated above. I wouldn't really mind Bond franchise closing down. I pretty much think all has been said and done about Bond. We've had typical Bond scripts from Fleming books, we've had relaunches, we've had reboots, etc. In the end I guess all's done now. So, a bit like Harmsway, I wouldn't kill myself if they just decided to call it a day.

Then again, a bit like Zencat, I guess I could be "won back" if they decided to get on with something really different. Nothing to do with parting from QoS, which I quite enjoyed. More to do with the whole Bond approach: I think we need to really reevaluate the way a Bond story is told. Someone in another Forum topic mentionned an older-Bond idea (with Dalton starring): that could be something to explore. I mean, honnestly, Bond has saved the planet 10000 times. Time indeed to move on; I'm not sure I want to stick with Bond facing his 100th villain, helping bring down the 100th world domination plot, or getting his 100th super-car from Q-R Branch. Why not have something like the "Batman Beyond" comics and animated series, where you get an aged Bruce Wayne teaching and supervising from a distance a young Batman?

Maybe this delay could actually serve a great purpose: to completely rethink our Bond approach.

[Zorin Industries]

I will get shot down for this but is it worth remembering that the films are the dog that wags the tail/the books - not the other way round. Fleming continued writing the books partly (!) because of the films success generating further book sales. The publishing urges of the Ian Fleming camp are firmly led by the very high profile of the films. Yes, they are separate projects - but I wouldn't dismiss the films nor their importance just yet.

And an older Bond starring Dalton is an appalling idea. Sorry. I love the guy and his current renewed career but putting him in a Bond film as 007 (or even M) is a fan-led fantasy that completely misses the point of how and why the films worked then and work now.

[byline]

Y'know, astonishingly, I don't think I really care whether or not BOND 23 ever comes to fruition. If, today, it was announced that EON had closed up shop, that the Bond franchise had reached its end, I would shrug and move on.

That general ambivalence probably best explains why most of my posts are in the "General Discussion" thread. I'm not too bothered about the future of Bond anymore, and while I'll still treasure the Bond novels and films of yore (or at least some of 'em), I feel, more or less, as though I've said what I have to say on that subject.

Time to move on, I suppose.

Hang in there Harmsway. I'm also feeling what you're feeling in regards to the films. My Bond book mania has never been stronger, but the movies...I don't know. So weird how this feels like the "gap" years all over again. As much as I love CR and Craig, there's something about this new hyper real approach that doesn't work for me. Not sure I want to "live" in that world, know what I mean? QOS certainly did not help. Again, very much how I felt after LTK. And back then the day did come that Eon "closed up shop" (put the franchise up for sale) and I did shrug and moved on. But then it came back and hit me right in that sweet spot and the mania flared right back up again. Indifference isn't such a bad attitude to hold during all this delay muck. But the price for Eon is they are now going to have to win me (us?) back.

Strange, I feel the opposite. I guess we all have different opinions, backed by different reasons for why we feel the way we do. (Well, duh! Restating the obvious, I know.) But with Craig, I had just begun feeling excited about the series . . . only to have it snatched away by MGM's bungling. So for me, this is all extremely disappointing.

[tdalton]

Strange, I feel the opposite. I guess we all have different opinions, backed by different reasons for why we feel the way we do. (Well, duh! Restating the obvious, I know.) But with Craig, I had just begun feeling excited about the series . . . only to have it snatched away by MGM's bungling. So for me, this is all extremely disappointing.

I feel pretty much the same way as well. I love the "hyper-real" direction that they've decided to take the franchise with Craig, and Quantum of Solace really energized my excitement for the franchise after I thought that they were going to continuously try to toe the line between the new direction and the old franchise like they did a bit with Casino Royale for many films to come. Now that there's a possibility that Craig will end up being another Dalton (not saying it will happen, but there's now at least something of a possibility there), I can't help feel anything other than some sense of disappointment, since a new actor will probably mean a change in direction.

With all of that said, I still somewhat saw this coming even back when they cast Craig. I loved the idea of Craig in the role even as far back as a year before he actually got it, that I knew something would come along and mess things up, so I was always expecting a fairly short tenure for him in the part anyway, since things seemed to really be working against him in the beginning (media initially not on board, being an even-numbered Bond, radical shift in tone of the series, etc). Hopefully they find a way to keep things moving, as I've found Craig to be nothing short of brilliant in the role.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Spyglass film studios favourite to win MGM deal

Both sides are said to be pushing to get a deal done before a waiver on MGM's debt expires in mid-July.

http://www.thisislon...for-mgm-role.do

As much as I know Zorin Captain and MHarkin (who I Swear i have no problem with) are going to say i'm stupid for asking this I'm still a firm believer in there is no such thing as a stupid question


If this goes through does this mean Bond 23 might come out in 2011? or is that still a pipedream irregardless of another company buying MGM.

[Zorin Industries]

It is NOT just a case of MGM getting "sorted" (and that has hardly happened in decades) but what Bond management and their legal bods make of any new development. And it took six years for the last big legal campaign with an MGM issue at its core to get "sorted" (albeit in a different context).

The fat lady isn't singing yet. She's not even left home to get into her opera-bound car yet. Though she could well get a quick lift to the stage if the traffic suddenly cleared.

[Loomis]

Y'know, astonishingly, I don't think I really care whether or not BOND 23 ever comes to fruition.

Yeah. After QUANTUM OF ARSELESS, it's hard to care any more.

It would be a pity for the series to go out (or at least go on a long hiatus) on such a bum note. If only CASINO ROYALE had been the final film - there's no possibility of the Bond series ever ending on more of a high than that.

Reading Zorin's latest post, I'm getting the feeling that BOND 23 may be a good few years away. If that's the case, then it's also a shame that Craig was cut down in his prime (he would be a far bigger loss than Dalton ever was), but at the same time the omens for BOND 23 were cringe-inducing (screenplay by Peter Morgan, direction by Sam Mendes), so it may be that we've actually been saved another pretentious, joyless so-called 007 adventure put together by a bunch of Oscar-baiting luvvies.

My Bond fandom is still alive and well, but it's increasingly based on nostalgia: Fleming and the older films. I'm looking forward to seeing how Deaver's PROJECT X turns out, but only out of basic curiosity - I seriously doubt it'll rock my world.

Filmwise, though, there are other franchises to get excited about: BATMAN BEGINS 3 is coming, as is MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE IV. Bourne looks set for a codename theory reboot under Tony Gilroy, while DIE HARD 5 is a possibility and an EXPENDABLES sequel seems likely. I think us action junkies can live without more Bond for a bit.

[Zorin Industries]

Couldn't agree less Loomis.... and since when did MI:IV represent a good alternative to Bond (??!!). ;o)

[tdalton]

Filmwise, though, there are other franchises to get excited about: BATMAN BEGINS 3 is coming, as is MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE IV. Bourne looks set for a codename theory reboot under Tony Gilroy, while DIE HARD 5 is a possibility and an EXPENDABLES sequel seems likely. I think us action junkies can live without more Bond for a bit.

With the exception of M:I-IV (as I'm still a big fan of Tom Cruise's films), if that's what the action genre is going to be offering up over the next few years, then I can't hope enough that Bond makes a swift return to the screen, and in the form of Daniel Craig.

[jaguar007]

As much as I know Zorin Captain and MHarkin (who I Swear i have no problem with) are going to say i'm stupid for asking this I'm still a firm believer in there is no such thing as a stupid question


If this goes through does this mean Bond 23 might come out in 2011? or is that still a pipedream irregardless of another company buying MGM.

IF the Spyglass deal goes through before mid-July, I don't think I would want Bond 23 being released in 2011. unless they really have quite a bit of pre-production already done (which I doubt) trying to rush the film in the cinema by November 2011 would just give us a rushed Bond film. I would prefer they shoot for a Summer 2012 release and took the extra 6 months to really get the film right.

[Loomis]

Couldn't agree less Loomis.... and since when did MI:IV represent a good alternative to Bond (??!!). ;o)

With the exception of M:I-IV (as I'm still a big fan of Tom Cruise's films), if that's what the action genre is going to be offering up over the next few years, then I can't hope enough that Bond makes a swift return to the screen, and in the form of Daniel Craig.

*Frankie Howerd voice*

Oh, please yourselves.

[DamnCoffee]

As much as I know Zorin Captain and MHarkin (who I Swear i have no problem with) are going to say i'm stupid for asking this I'm still a firm believer in there is no such thing as a stupid question


If this goes through does this mean Bond 23 might come out in 2011? or is that still a pipedream irregardless of another company buying MGM.

IF the Spyglass deal goes through before mid-July, I don't think I would want Bond 23 being released in 2011. unless they really have quite a bit of pre-production already done (which I doubt) trying to rush the film in the cinema by November 2011 would just give us a rushed Bond film. I would prefer they shoot for a Summer 2012 release and took the extra 6 months to really get the film right.

I think they have quite a lot of pre-production work done. I think it's safe to say that EON are still hard at work on Bond 23, even though being officially delayed. I think the Bond team never really stop working.