1017 replies to this topic

[SecretAgentFan]

It actually irks me that EON now claims mounting a film is so exhausting.

 

Excuse me?

 

Are you in the business of making blockbuster movies or not?  And if you can´t take the heat...

 

Ranting a bit today, sorry about that.

[Orion]

When EON knew where the money was coming from, they DID go for every two years. Huge gaps after LTK, DAD, QOS and the one now are all from the MGM side, not EON. QOS was two years after CR and Spectre WAS going to be two years after Skyfall until someone insisted only Mendes would do in regards to director, so they had to wait a year for him to be available. So whilst this thread seems to have decided that EON intentionally want long gaps and away from the traditional two years - the truth is, when they could, they have gone for that, only legal issue has stopped them doing it more over the last 2 (nearly 3) decades.

[Mr. Somerset]

When EON knew where the money was coming from, they DID go for every two years. Huge gaps after LTK, DAD, QOS and the one now are all from the MGM side, not EON. QOS was two years after CR and Spectre WAS going to be two years after Skyfall until someone insisted only Mendes would do in regards to director, so they had to wait a year for him to be available. So whilst this thread seems to have decided that EON intentionally want long gaps and away from the traditional two years - the truth is, when they could, they have gone for that, only legal issue has stopped them doing it more over the last 2 (nearly 3) decades.

Does seem like MGM really tends to hold things up. I thought it was great that QoS was in production back to the 2 year release. At the time it seemed like things had returned to normal after the 4 year break from DAD to CR. Then the bankruptcy situation occurred.

I still am baffled why EON is only offering a one film deal to the bidding studios. Also we haven't heard any updates about that in weeks. I wonder how that's coming along?

[SecretAgentFan]

Well, I think it´s not that easy.  Sure, one can blame MGM for many things - but they would definitely not have said no to more Bond films and made it possible to distribute them.

 

QOS came so fast because the second Bond film for any actor comes fast in order to cement him in the public´s eye.

 

After that, EON bowed to Craig´s demands too much and too often.  If Craig had said after SPECTRE "okay, guys, see you in two years to fulfill my contract" EON could have and would have told MGM to clear up the distribution situation.

[MISALA1994]

I think 3 year gap between SF and SP was solid.

Edited by MISALA1994, 07 June 2017 - 03:37 PM.

[Dustin]

There's been a couple of times when MGM were blowing the trumpet of having a Bond film in the works every other year. Same with Sony, as late as prior to SPECTRE, if memory serves. Only neither MGM nor Sony had the power to make such decisions. It's true that the real financial troubles originated with MGM. But it's also true Eon firmly stepped on the brakes whenever there was pressure to accelerate the whole Bond train. Partially that may have been just to make a point on who's going to call the shots with 007 - but it also hints at a general reluctance to keep the Bond machine running at low revs between films.

[mummyboy11]

The Spectre Facebook page (which I believe is managed by 007.com) has just changed is name to "James Bond 007 Movies"... 

 

Could be nothing, though...

[sharpshooter]

The Spectre Facebook page (which I believe is managed by 007.com) has just changed is name to "James Bond 007 Movies"... 

 

Could be nothing, though...

It's been a while since SPECTRE was released. There's nothing to promote with it anymore. 

[Napoleon Solo]

There's been a couple of times when MGM were blowing the trumpet of having a Bond film in the works every other year. Same with Sony, as late as prior to SPECTRE, if memory serves. Only neither MGM nor Sony had the power to make such decisions. It's true that the real financial troubles originated with MGM. But it's also true Eon firmly stepped on the brakes whenever there was pressure to accelerate the whole Bond train. Partially that may have been just to make a point on who's going to call the shots with 007 - but it also hints at a general reluctance to keep the Bond machine running at low revs between films.

 

MGM, during its 2010 bankruptcy, filed a business plan that included having Bond movies resume an every-other-year schedule. But the studio backed off that after the release of Skyfall.

Sony, during publicity for Skyfall, said Bond 24 (later SPECTRE) would be out by 2014. But Barbara Broccoli and Daniel Craig (in a joint interview) said the Sony executive involved was speaking too soon. 

[Professor Pi]

I wonder if the movies would have come out faster had Skyfall only grossed $500M instead of the billion dollars that gave EON a financial cushion.

[Dustin]

Let's just say that would certainly have changed circumstances...

[SecretAgentFan]

An intriguing question.  I imagine that a "middling" success for SKYFALL would probably have raised question marks about Daniel Craig´s drawing power.  Maybe he himself would have stepped down earlier.  And maybe the current impasse would have prevented another movie.  

 

That way, I rather have SPECTRE than no Bond film since 2012.

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Been a while since we even had a rumour. Not sure about this one mind you..?

https://hmssweblog.w...a-007-universe/

[Dustin]

Oh yes, the universe...

Perfectly feasible from a strictly entrepreneurial point of view - provided you are prepared for a vastly expanded setup on the production side. Do we currently have any indication Eon are stretching their muscles for a two-or-more set of spinoffs to marry them with their main product somewhere down the line in 2025*? Is there even indication for a firm schedule of Bond films right at the moment?

Frankly, the universe thingy is a no-brainer any big studio would currently float if they had their say with Bond. But from Eon I don't expect much sympathy for the scheme. No doubt they have already a whole cellar room full with proposals and pitches for branching out Bond.

*and very likely aiming for a film per year, otherwise the whole universe fad wouldn't make a lot of sense...

[mummyboy11]

They can't even cope with one character story-arc production schedule, never mind a universe of them... We'ld get a Bond movie every twenty years!

 

Get some movies done, why don't they...(!!!!)

[Pussfeller]

Like most "universe" concepts, it's a terrible idea. 

 

The Bond universe is basically just the character of James Bond. None of the other characters can sustain a film, much less a series of films. What are they going to do, create a Q origin story? Standalone Moneypenny adventures? Not every fictional universe is a pantheon of distinctive, autonomous characters that can furnish an annual blockbuster. And that's fine. Everything doesn't have to be Marvel.  

 

And as Mummyboy just said, if the producers can barely summon the energy to make three films per decade, I don't see them branching out into a film-a-year Flemingverse. 

[Tiin007]

Also, would MGM still maintain the rights to these supposed spin-off films? Because if so, from a production and financial standpoint, this would be a logistical nightmare. MGM have caused enough issues when it comes to a regular release schedule-- I don't think MGM has the wherewithal to handle such a massive undertaking. 

[Mr. Somerset]

I'd really like to see a Mr. Mendel origin story on how he got to be a banker. Lines around the block for that one.

A stand alone Moneypenny and M film would probably be more likely, and that could lead to a Tanner spin off.

Each of these would still be 3-4 years apart not starting production until 2019 at the earliest.

At that rate Bond himself might not appear in his own film again until 2033.

Maybe Daniel will make up his mind by then.

 

[SecretAgentFan]

It was just a matter of time when this bug would infect EON.

 

Thankfully, with the resilience to quick decisions and production starts...

[mummyboy11]

I'd really like to see a Mr. Mendel origin story on how he got to be a banker.(...)

 

                     

[SecretAgentFan]

I sincerely hope this is just a rumour.

 

Making movies about other 00´s would diminish the special status of 007.

[Gobi-1]

I'd really like to see a Mr. Mendel origin story on how he got to be a banker. Lines around the block for that one.

This time he's bringing the chocolate!

 

Ludger Pistor

is

Mr. Medel

in

From Switzerland with Cash

[SecretAgentFan]

But he only deals with people from his past.

[KHergesheimer]

fairly certain EON know whether Criag is back or not. To some degree this does feel similar to the post-DAD period when in Brosnan's words things were "opaque", but in reality we know they are were recasting and changing gears. The rumours around Nolan directing and betting on Tom Hardy do add some fuel to the fire that things may be in transition. So perhaps we do have a search on for a new Bond and a new approach. On the other hand they may just be busy nailing down a script to make Craig happy. You got to think he will want to go out of a high note, and Spectre doesn't exactly do that. And five films seems like a credible contribution to the canon.

[Tiin007]

While I would certainly hope Craig stays for one more to "go out on a high note," a part me is more interested in what comes next. 

 

I don't particularly care if the next actor's tenure is dark or campy, interconnected or individual entries (although I'd argue that combining these methods is ideal). I care most that they are released regularly and with advance planning-- I'd like Bond #7's oeuvre to have more consistency than Craig's (which, while often hitting highs, feels more disjointed than any of the previous eras). 

[Mr. Somerset]

I pretty much feel if we get nothing officially announced by the end of this year , which is looking more and more like it could be the case, then I'd rather not wait until 2019 just for a final Craig outing. At the rate they're going that would most likely lead to yet another gap of uncertainty following B25.  Craig's successor might not debut until 2023/2024. 

[SecretAgentFan]

Yes, if there are no news this year BOND 25 will debut in 2019 at the earliest, making it four years since Craig last appeared in SPECTRE.  

 

And really, who has to watch Craig do then a farewell movie?  

 

He has had his four.  Now it´s time for someone else.  Someone who loves the role and does not need lots of downtime to even consider doing another one.

[Dustin]

It's not even sure how much progress could be made if there was news these next few months. It's not as if soundstages, crews and locations could be booked overnight, so there would be some delay anyway, even if there were major revelations this very week.

I suppose by now the announcement of BOND 25 with a new actor would probably be more of a scoop than a return of Craig. A new name would keep the public guessing, how will he tackle the part, will he be Craig's Bond or Brosnan's, will it be a serious entry or a fantastical one, so on. And the guy's attitude towards landing the part would also give a hint how much more Bond we're going to see in theatres.

[Orion]

Entriely speculative - but perhaps a studio has been found, and the announcement regarding Bond 25 is being delayed so as not to interfere with work on a different film. If WB has won it, I'd imagine they'd want Nolan as their director and Hardy as Bond (assuming they go for recast) in which case the release of Dunkirk would be impacted by such an announcement - if they think its a good bit of aded publicity it would be announced just before the cast and crew start their press tour, however if they think it might distract from their own film, they'd leave it till after. Again this is entirely speculative and I was merely using WB and Dunkirk as the example given the rumors surrounding Nolan and Hardy, but any studio could be in this situation - Bond films aren't made in a vacuum.

[SecretAgentFan]

If WB has won the distribution contest, this indeed could be the strategy.

 

I just hope it won´t be Nolan and Hardy.

 

 

Considering this whole "show me who wants Bond distribution the most"-affair, I don´t think that it ended with EON not choosing anyone.  A decision was definitely made.

 

So, why not tell the public yet?

 

- the mentioned WB situation

 

or

 

- Craig getting cold feet and bowing out.  Which would render the whole idea of having a studio do a one-film-distribution deal useless and involve a recasting which has to take place before a distributor signs on.

 

 

Another scenario: MGW retiring and BB considering to step back/sell because she wants to do other things.

 

Yes, Greg Wilson seemed to be getting groomed to follow in MGW´s footsteps.  But BB seems to be the deciding factor here.  The question is: would she ever leave her father´s legacy behind?