1025 replies to this topic

[The Shark]

Give me MI6 blown-up, Bond injured and then tricked by a brainwashed kidnapping victim and a decently-researched oil pipeline plot over a sperm bank one any day.

James Bond in a microcosm, is sex, violence and snobbery. The sperm bank is a far more "Bondian" canvas in every respect than the lame, contrived, soap opera or "lifetime channel" twists and turns of TWINE.

Purvis and Wade, could never in a million years be able to muster the wit, imagination or balls to think of placing a sperm bank in a Bond film.

[zencat]

Give me MI6 blown-up, Bond injured and then tricked by a brainwashed kidnapping victim and a decently-researched oil pipeline plot over a sperm bank one any day.

James Bond in a microcosm, is sex, violence and snobbery. The sperm bank is a far more "Bondian" canvas in every respect than the lame, contrived, soap opera or "lifetime channel" twists and turns of TWINE.

Yep, I'm with The Shark.

(But you cats have really thrown this thread WAY off topic.)

[marktmurphy]

Give me MI6 blown-up, Bond injured and then tricked by a brainwashed kidnapping victim and a decently-researched oil pipeline plot over a sperm bank one any day.

James Bond in a microcosm, is sex, violence and snobbery. The sperm bank is a far more "Bondian" canvas in every respect than the lame, contrived, soap opera or "lifetime channel" twists and turns of TWINE.

Sperm banks aren't sexy! There's nothing snobbish or violent about them, for that matter. A Caviar Factory says more about snobbery! And aside from being placed in that location it's an utterly standard Bond plot. TWINE is at least trying to show us things we haven't seen before. DAD too: I can't think of any attempts to do anything quite as surprising as locking Bond up for a year and a half in the books. Neither are perfect, but I can't think of anything interesting in a Benson book.

[The Shark]

Give me MI6 blown-up, Bond injured and then tricked by a brainwashed kidnapping victim and a decently-researched oil pipeline plot over a sperm bank one any day.

James Bond in a microcosm, is sex, violence and snobbery. The sperm bank is a far more "Bondian" canvas in every respect than the lame, contrived, soap opera or "lifetime channel" twists and turns of TWINE.

Sperm banks aren't sexy!

You've been going to the wrong sperm banks, my friend.

[Trident]

Give me MI6 blown-up, Bond injured and then tricked by a brainwashed kidnapping victim and a decently-researched oil pipeline plot over a sperm bank one any day.

James Bond in a microcosm, is sex, violence and snobbery. The sperm bank is a far more "Bondian" canvas in every respect than the lame, contrived, soap opera or "lifetime channel" twists and turns of TWINE.

Sperm banks aren't sexy! And aside from being placed in that location it's an utterly standard Bond plot. TWINE is at least trying to show us things we haven't seen before. DAD too: I can't think of any attempts to do anything quite as surprising as locking Bond up for a year and a half in the books. Neither are perfect, but I can't think of anything interesting in a Benson book.

Can't agree there. Right from the top of my tophat:
-Having Bond surviving a planecrash in the outback
-Having Bond trying to retrieve a McGuffin from a planecrash in the Himalayas
-Having Bond with severe brain damage running from his own people
-Having Bond tortured (just for the fun of it, mind you) by frying little tattoos into his retina
-Having Bond escape capture on a lunch of fresh rat, minus spices
-Having Bond in a little S/M session with a Japanese underground

Benson certainly had some terrific ideas at times and I'd argue he had at least one good to very good scene in every book.

[The Girl With The Golden Gun]

We seriously can't take another 6 years, as was to be after Dalton's departure.
Unfortunately i got the first whiff of this from Digital Spy, not the most newsworthy source but a source nonetheless:

http://www.digitalsp...m-scrapped.html

Why and how has MGM got themselves into this mess? Bond is undoutedly a cash cow & surely something can be done to get them out of this mire. Whilst i'm not surprised no-one wants to touch the debt-ridden studio with a ten foot bargepole, there must be a consortium somewhere with the means to bail them out?? Here's hoping...although for how long, who knows.

This is indeed a very black day for the franchise & for cinema as we know it.

Btw, turning to the continuation novels is something i've been suggesting for a loooong loooong time.. with the Benson books, they could give and take a little. But there is material there worth committing to the screen & worthy of a decent Bond outing, IMHO.

[Harmsway]

-Having Bond tortured (just for the fun of it, mind you) by frying little tattoos into his retina

I always thought the retina tattoos were a wonderfully Fleminesque notion.

[tdalton]

[edit]

[Germanlady]

Always wanted to know, how it was possible, that they could make two films at the same time - the last one with Roger and the last one with Connery? No license rights problems back then?

If, for example, EON would decide to make a Bond film, but don´t call him Bond, call him Jack whatever - rename the main characters and just go on with the script they have? Everybody would know its a Bond film but like this, it would have no rights issues. And it would be such a sweet slap into MGM´s face. Stupid idea??

[SecretAgentFan]

Yes, very stupid idea.

And the rights situation with NSNA was due to the THUNDERBALL-McClory connection.

[Germanlady]

Yes, very stupid idea.

And the rights situation with NSNA was due to the THUNDERBALL-McClory connection.

Allright - but would you mind telling me why exactly?

I think, if you can´t get something you want one way - find another.

Edited by Germanlady, 03 July 2010 - 07:52 AM.

[Zorin Industries]

It all boils down to Danjaq(EON) not wanting to pay royalties to the continuation author.

That is not the situation.

Always wanted to know, how it was possible, that they could make two films at the same time - the last one with Roger and the last one with Connery? No license rights problems back then?

If, for example, EON would decide to make a Bond film, but don´t call him Bond, call him Jack whatever - rename the main characters and just go on with the script they have? Everybody would know its a Bond film but like this, it would have no rights issues. And it would be such a sweet slap into MGM´s face. Stupid idea??

Yes, stupid idea (sorry!).

The 1983 double-bill of Bond scenario was centred on the THUNDERBALL rights situation. This current impasse is about the rights for ALL the Bond films past, present and maybe even future.

[bondrules]

http://www.mi6.co.uk...d...=mi6&s=news

Anyone else see this link over at mi6.co.uk?? Saying the production is "canned" and "axed" just totally depresses me! I do still hold out hope that production is merely suspended and hopefully will get going ASAP, but if going by this article, it seems as though another 6 year Dalton-Brosnan drought may come of this and I fear that Daniel Craig will NOT want to wait around that long and may force EON to let him out of his contract...of course it's just a fear at the moment, and who knows we may get some positive news...eventually!! Damn you MGM...Damn you all the way to HELL!! *insert evil Bond, villian-esque laugh*

This doesn’t mean the end of the Bond films. The question is how long it will take to make another one.”

Not the end of Bond films, but the end of the Craig era most certainly. EON would certainly want a fresh start after such a wide timeframe between films.

[Mr. Somerset]

http://www.mi6.co.uk...d...=mi6&s=news

Anyone else see this link over at mi6.co.uk?? Saying the production is "canned" and "axed" just totally depresses me! I do still hold out hope that production is merely suspended and hopefully will get going ASAP, but if going by this article, it seems as though another 6 year Dalton-Brosnan drought may come of this and I fear that Daniel Craig will NOT want to wait around that long and may force EON to let him out of his contract...of course it's just a fear at the moment, and who knows we may get some positive news...eventually!! Damn you MGM...Damn you all the way to HELL!! *insert evil Bond, villian-esque laugh*

This doesn’t mean the end of the Bond films. The question is how long it will take to make another one.”

Not the end of Bond films, but the end of the Craig era most certainly. EON would certainly want a fresh start after such a wide timeframe between films.

I suppose that would depend on Craig's availability when this mess is sorted out. I imagine he would be released from his contract, or it would expire anyhow. Perhaps the wait won't be quite as long as the Dalton era? That delay was really due to the fact Broccoli was fighting over the then current owner of MGM's distributing the Bonds on television and video....if memory serves me correctly. I'm sincerely hoping that EON is simply waiting for MGM to get their finacial situation sorted out, and will proceed as planned. Until Eon makes a formal announcement that the film is axed, it is just a rumour to me. I'll wait until this makes CBn's front page

[Matt_13]

I'm not totally convinced Craig is going to be axed. Depending on his mood when the time comes to make new films, I think he could most certainly star in the next one, especially considering his popularity. We'll see, in the end it's up to Danjaq as mentioned.

[zencat]

I don' think Craig will be "axed", but there is a question of how his contract reads. I'm sure he's contracted for multiple films and options for films, but these are typically time sensitive -- you can't just lock someone into a life-long commit to make 3 films, you usually have to commence those films within a set number of years, and if you don't, you still have to pay them for the film. It's called "Pay or Play." I believe this is what happened with Dalton. I think his contract ran out (he was probably paid for his third film) and would need to be re-negociated. This is the point at which studios start to rethink a star, especially if the star is going to be expensive to bring back.

[jaguar007]

No, I don't think Craig will be axed. He is far more popular with the public than Dalton was. I think a longer than usual gap, followed by the return of Craig as Bond will most likely lead to gang buster in the box office (especially if Cowboys and Aliens is a box office smash).

[zencat]

He is popular. BUT, really, it's so much about money. If Cowboys & Aliens is a smash and if Craig's contract runs out (and he's paid out for a film he didn't make) and then he comes back into a fresh negotiation and asks for the moon plus a share of profits -- bet your he'll be replaced. Just look at what happened with Spiderman. Fans never take money into consideration, but out there I find it's almost entirely about money. It's a brutal business.

(But I also don't believe Craig would ask the moon and Danjaq would be on his side. They'd work it out.)

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

As popular as Craig is I think above all there are no guarantees on absolutely anything until this MGM affair is sorted. Perhaps the only guarantee is the reassurance that EON will protect the legacy at all costs.

[SecretAgentFan]

I guess it all depends on how long it will take to sort out the MGM mess and do the next Bond film. Craig will want to return as Bond and do at least one more film. I think Craig is so popular as Bond that EON would seriously endanger their great position now if they recasted the part too quickly.

Question is: how long do you think EON would have to wait to recast the role without the audience being disappointed.

My bet is four more years. At that point Craig will be absent from the role for six years.

[Colossus]

I was looking at the aicn article (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45670) for this new situation and found this interesting post:

I'm A Lifelong Bond Fanatic And, through my work, I have some connections to the people who make the films - and I have to put forth a theory here that I don't think anyone seems to be picking up on. The Broccolis, that is Barbara and her stepbrother Michael Wilson, are in complete control of Bond and seem to be using MGM's status as an excuse to stop making the films. Why would they do that? Because they're greedy and lazy and they're tired. This is a family business they inherited and thus they never had the same passion (or, IMHO, the creative understanding) for that their father did. They have swung like a pendulum trying to guess what the public wants, but they don't seem to truly "get" what makes their hero/franchise so special. But on every film they have made these unbelievable "Producer Fees" above and beyond their ownership of the franchise and they are filthy ****ing rich. Ever wonder why Bond doesn't seem to end up in a major city anymore, like Bourne does? Because instead of putting the money "back on the screen" the way Cubby did, they put it all in their pockets. They don't really care that much, but they are also confused by the mixed responses they get their flailing. (QOS was a good film that could have been great, IMO, with just a better edit) It's not unlike what happened after Licence To Kill. Cubby stopped making the films not because he was in the middle of a lawsuit - that is the PR myth that Bond fans have been repeating for years - no, he was tired. Dalton's second film was the closest thing the series had to an outright box office bomb. His stepson was in charge and running this great series into the ground. Wilson wrote a script all by himself...Cubby read it and rejected it...and a six year "hiatus" was born. At that point, Cubby was old and didn't want the grief, wanted a break after 25 years of making Bond movies. I think the same thing is happening now. I think these two just want to do nothing and enjoy life. It could be the development of the new script wasn't going very well, or it just presented choices they were tired of making. But they have the right to take Bond anywhere they want. This MGM situation just gives them an excuse to go on holiday. I'm not demonizing them. They're just very very rich and this business is not something that's really in their veins - it could be a chain of hardware stores for all they really care. I say this not just as a fan, but as somebody who has known people working on the films. So... While I'm very disappointed, I'm wondering if maybe this isn't the beginning of the Broccolis selling off Bond altogether and getting out of the 007 business. I hope so. I think the series would benefit from the stewardship of someone new and fresh and who really loves it. That's my two cents. Sorry for the long post, guys.

[zencat]

Well that's quite a fresh take on this.

Wilson wrote a script all by himself...Cubby read it and rejected it...and a six year "hiatus" was born.

Don't think that's accurate.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I was looking at the aicn article (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45670) for this new situation and found this interesting post:

I'm A Lifelong Bond Fanatic And, through my work, I have some connections to the people who make the films - and I have to put forth a theory here that I don't think anyone seems to be picking up on. The Broccolis, that is Barbara and her stepbrother Michael Wilson, are in complete control of Bond and seem to be using MGM's status as an excuse to stop making the films. Why would they do that? Because they're greedy and lazy and they're tired. This is a family business they inherited and thus they never had the same passion (or, IMHO, the creative understanding) for that their father did. They have swung like a pendulum trying to guess what the public wants, but they don't seem to truly "get" what makes their hero/franchise so special. But on every film they have made these unbelievable "Producer Fees" above and beyond their ownership of the franchise and they are filthy ****ing rich. Ever wonder why Bond doesn't seem to end up in a major city anymore, like Bourne does? Because instead of putting the money "back on the screen" the way Cubby did, they put it all in their pockets. They don't really care that much, but they are also confused by the mixed responses they get their flailing. (QOS was a good film that could have been great, IMO, with just a better edit) It's not unlike what happened after Licence To Kill. Cubby stopped making the films not because he was in the middle of a lawsuit - that is the PR myth that Bond fans have been repeating for years - no, he was tired. Dalton's second film was the closest thing the series had to an outright box office bomb. His stepson was in charge and running this great series into the ground. Wilson wrote a script all by himself...Cubby read it and rejected it...and a six year "hiatus" was born. At that point, Cubby was old and didn't want the grief, wanted a break after 25 years of making Bond movies. I think the same thing is happening now. I think these two just want to do nothing and enjoy life. It could be the development of the new script wasn't going very well, or it just presented choices they were tired of making. But they have the right to take Bond anywhere they want. This MGM situation just gives them an excuse to go on holiday. I'm not demonizing them. They're just very very rich and this business is not something that's really in their veins - it could be a chain of hardware stores for all they really care. I say this not just as a fan, but as somebody who has known people working on the films. So... While I'm very disappointed, I'm wondering if maybe this isn't the beginning of the Broccolis selling off Bond altogether and getting out of the 007 business. I hope so. I think the series would benefit from the stewardship of someone new and fresh and who really loves it. That's my two cents. Sorry for the long post, guys.

I agree with Zencat, and I don't this is at all accurate. Interesting post, but almost a direct opposite to my understanding of Bond and the events of the time. I am sure I am not the only forum member on CBn that could pull this statement to pieces if required.

[zencat]

I only said the Wilson solo script statement was inaccurate. The rest...who knows. But it reads more like an opinion.

I wonder if there's anything in their deal that specifies the must make a film every X years or the rights revert back to the Fleming family. The original deal had this built into it. I'd hope there's something like this. They can't squat on film rights forever, can they?

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I only said the Wilson solo script statement was inaccurate.

Sorry, my post meant to read that I agree with the specific comments in your post above mine, AND I additionally think the generality of the quoted statement is inaccurate.

[doublenoughtspy]

That AICN post is pathetic.

While DANJAQ/Eon own the rights to Bond, they don't have unlimited George Lucas-esque funds - so they can neither self-finance nor self-distribute a film.

So when MGM is in turmoil, they don't make the films.

Calling them tired or lazy shows that the person posting is just angry at them.

Zencat - while the original deal did have timing provisions, it was done when there were a finite number of Fleming titles left to adapt. Once the deal was changed to include new adventures outside of adaptations, my guess is any time limitations were taken out.

[zencat]

I gotta say, I wonder sometimes why they still do it. Michael has other passions and I don't think Babs has ever loved Bond. She's always talked about making other films, and she proved herself with CR. It could be they still do it because the have to do it to keep the golden goose in the family. Hard for me to believe the Flemings (or their smart lawyers) gave them film rights which they could elect to never use. But maybe.

(I also believe they are Lucas-level rich.)

[zencat]

True they don't appear to be setting up heirs to run the franchise, but I suspect they'd like to leave the franchise to their heirs who could hire someone to run it or partner with an established producer, etc. It's a big family, and I'm sure they have their favorite nieces and nephews. (Hmmm...maybe it's not too late to marry into this whole thing. )

[doublenoughtspy]

(I also believe they are Lucas-level rich.)

Well at last report, Lucas was worth $3.5 billion and rising, and neither Wilson nor Broccoli ever make any "wealthiest" list that has ever been published.

Perhaps if they combined their fortunes they might make such a list.

And if they had Lucas level funds, I would think they could throw a bunch of money at MGM and buy back Bond and be free and clear.

[bondrules]

delete