Just so. What it comes down to is a yes or a no. Somewhere I've read Craig was "about to agree". What's that supposed to mean, that he stopped just short of nodding because he got a cramp in his neck?
Supposedly his decision will be based on a script. But whatever the script is, if Craig is not willing to return in general the script won't probably make much difference either way.
As for the direction of the talks, as far as anybody can say it seems there hasn't been much talking previously, which is what opened up the Hiddleston box in the first place.
My take is that Craig will only give it one more go if he gets a say with the director. With the script they will muddle through then somehow.
But what this really points to is something different: somewhere in the background there's got to be a studio and it looks as if they are willing to do a one-off with BOND 25. The reasoning would be to line up Craig, the script, the director and a distribution agreement with a profits margin - and then present it to MGM. It would likely be far from what their management had in mind, but if it's take it or leave it...
You´re pointing at the central problem here: Craig might return - but only for one last film. So any distributor will tell MGM: yeah, with Craig we´re willing to do a one-movie-contract. But with the next unproven actor the conditions must cover our potential losses.
It won´t even help if EON presented a plan for the future, with an actor already locked in to take over - because every actor´s box office appeal rises and falls unpredictably. And since Bond actor number 7 might take over in three to four years at the earliest he will have had either films tanking (making him unattractive for the studios) or cleaning up at the box office (making him reconsider whether he needs Bond or whether he deserves a much higher fee).
So - it´s a very tricky situation for everybody involved. Getting Craig back for one more film is probably a guarantee for huge box office results - but won´t resolve the crisis ahead. Not getting Craig back will make everybody´s goals and conditions much clearer to negotiate - but not easier since every new Bond actor is a risk.
As for Craig´s enjoyment of "Othello" - that project definitely was a major bone EON threw him. To reject another Bond after that definitely would be bad, bad form. Then again, this is show business, and Craig has enough money to never work again. So it is a question for him of whether he will have fun with BOND 25. And that will depend on the following conditions (for him as for any star):
- will the film hurt or strengthen my status? (in Craig´s case: will this Bond film be considered as a great ending to my tenure and have a better critical reception than SPECTRE?)
- who is directing? (Since Mendes seems to be out of contention, the director must be able to play nicely with Craig and have a wow-factor that also enhances the project and therefore Craig himself)
- where will it be filmed? (No actor, especially those with wives, spouses or kids, likes to be away from home for too long, and many stars actually choose films that can be filmed close enough so they can at least fly back easily on weekends etc.)
- how long will it take? (Like Connery, Craig will probably add a penalty-clause to his contract, so that filming will have to end as scheduled; and Craig definitely will never want to commit again to a grueling SPECTRE-like schedule again, so expect not a lot of globetrotting but more of a one main location Bond film)
- who are my co-stars? (If Craig got along with Waltz it might be possible to see the latter as Blofeld again. If not... Blofeld is out or will be recast. Also, it is absolutely clear that Craig has the right to approve his leading lady. He needs to like her, too - but not too much, if you want to believe the rumours of his marriage status.)
- and finally: how much money will I make? (In Craig´s case, it´s not really about getting as much as possible, but more of a symbolical view of "how much am I worth to this production, and I certainly won´t accept less than before, especially not on a blockbuster which will make everybody else rich because of ME!)
These are all vaild concerns, of course - but they are the reasons why stars often hesitate so long to commit to a role. And even if they give interviews in which they state that the script is the most important factor to them...
.. it´s not. It never is. You can bring them "Citizen Kane" and still they would ask: yeah, but not with that director, those co-stars, or that money, and I certainly won´t travel to that country...
