214 replies to this topic

[Vauxhall]

It's also confirmed that Neal Purvis and Robert Wade are returning as the writers.

[jamie00007]

So another four year gap between films.. Ugh. With all these delays between films its really starting to feel like the Craig era is being dragged out, especially with the misguided ideas of trying to tie them all together. I love Craig as Bond and CR is my favorite Bond film of them all, but Im ready for a fresh start.

[Dustin]

If Craig is on board for BOND 25 I wonder why they wouldn't say so right with this announcement. My take is, whatever they don't mention yet, they do so because they can't tell yet... 

[DavidJones]

I've been saying it shall be November 2019 for the last year, so it is no surprise. Seems we shall have a non-Craig Bond in late 2022, with another maybe in 2024.Which will make it 7 films in 20 years.

[sharpshooter]

I'm inclined to believe the NY Times story. I bet we hear more around October, which is the anniversary of Bond. They have plenty of time to play with. Dragging this confirmation out makes things more of an event/spectacle. My guess is David Arnold and Jeffrey Wright are on board too, judging by their recent social media activity. 

[Dustin]

Well, if it's 'a done deal' - as the NYT claims - then Craig is soon going to have ample opportunity to tell so himself; the upcoming promo campaign will see to that.

[Gobi-1]

http://birthmoviesde...bond-25-edition
 
Interesting tidbit in this article:

On the less official front, I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close wth the production that the Broccolis are looking to do one more Bond then sell the franchise off, a la George Lucas/Star Wars/Disney. If that comes to pass, it will be interesting times indeed for Ian Fleming's gentleman spy.

 

I've had a sense for awhile now that the Bond series would be entering a transitional era, regardless of who plays Bond. Some possibilities include Michael Wilson retiring, the next generation of the Broccoli family stepping up to take the helm, MGM being bought by another studio, etc., but selling the franchise and closing up shop would be a seismic shift.

[thecasinoroyale]

I wonder why they didn't confirm with a "Daniel Craig returns as James Bond in November 2019..."

 

Unless they want to drag it out even more coming up to 2 years now since we heard anything. And at just over 2 years production time, they're gonna have to hurry it up!

[Dustin]

There could be various reasons for not mentioning Craig yet, both with and without Craig on board. The only sure thing would seem to be that this is what they can say at this stage. We'll see what else transpires...

[DavidJones]

I'd be really excited about a sell off. It would certainly mean more films more frequently.

[Dustin]

http://birthmoviesde...bond-25-edition

Interesting tidbit in this article:On the less official front, I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close wth the production that the Broccolis are looking to do one more Bond then sell the franchise off, a la George Lucas/Star Wars/Disney. If that comes to pass, it will be interesting times indeed for Ian Fleming's gentleman spy.

I've had a sense for awhile now that the Bond series would be entering a transitional era, regardless of who plays Bond. Some possibilities include Michael Wilson retiring, the next generation of the Broccoli family stepping up to take the helm, MGM being bought by another studio, etc., but selling the franchise and closing up shop would be a seismic shift.

I have trouble seeing this as EON's plan. Wouldn't it put unnecessary added pressure on a film they haven't even properly conceived yet? The price tag for the franchise would almost entirely depend on BOND 25's performance - I don't think Eon will want to sell under such circumstances. I suspect if Eon really sells Bond it will not be in any way 'announced' - they likely will use a success with critics and record box office returns like CASINO ROYALE or SKYFALL - and then put the 'for sale' sign up.

[Surrie]

Did not expect this news last night, at all. At first reading of the press release, it seemed to me to be an almost hash job of an announcement! No confirmation of who will play Bond, which makes me wonder, do they want to keep us guessing or do they actually not have a clue themselves yet?!

 

I've also read murmurs online about Eon getting ready to sell the franchise... my first instinct is GOD NO! But, I'm never one for a change anyway. However, I would be severely disappointed is Mendes came back. 

[SecretAgentFan]

Okay...

 

I consider the New York Times a great newspaper.  But they, too, are striving for quick attention in today´s click-here-first-climate.  And entertainment journalism, regardless of which venue it is published in, is too often just leaning towards sources who want to stir up attention.

 

Consider this sentence again:

 

"But Mr. Craig´s return is a done deal, according to two people briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid conflicts with Eon and MGM."

 

If it is indeed a done deal, it will have been done by very few people who were sworn in to keep it a secret.  And Craig does not gain anything by having his agent tell the NYT.   

 

I don´t believe these "two people briefed on the matter", and if they wanted to avoid conflicts with EON and MGM they would not have said anything - because both parties will know exactly who knew about the deal if it had been done.

 

 

And this one from this "birth.movies.death"-website:

 

"On the less official front, I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close wth the production that the Broccolis are looking to do one more Bond then sell the franchise off, a la George Lucas/Star Wars/Disney."

 

"I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close with the production"...  What?  Thought reading now?  He probably means that he read something on message boards.  Such as... ours, by the way, since we were talking about this possibility a few weeks ago.

 

Again, I don´t believe this.  EON will never sell Bond, BB is not old enough (as Lucas was) to step back completely.  She rather would extend the production capabilities of EON and, if not interested anymore, hand it over to the next generation within EON.  But selling Bond?  C´mon...

[Surrie]

Can't see BB wanting to sell the franchise really, as they have always been passionate about keeping it in the family. I always presumed it would be handed down to Greg.

[Hockey Mask]

Can't see BB wanting to sell the franchise really, as they have always been passionate about keeping it in the family. I always presumed it would be handed down to Greg.

i would be VERY surprised.

[Tiin007]

Mixed feelings about selling the franchise. 

 

While it would invariably result in a more regular release schedule (and more of a proper vision being executed with forethought, rather than the current "let's play it by ear" approach), I'm afraid that the homages to old-school Bond  would never go away. We'd see the DB5 in every film, not to mention the reboot of classic villains and Bond girls. 

[SkyfallCraig]

My article about what we know so far:

https://www.jborbisn...what-we-expect/

[antovolk]

Okay...

 

I consider the New York Times a great newspaper.  But they, too, are striving for quick attention in today´s click-here-first-climate.  And entertainment journalism, regardless of which venue it is published in, is too often just leaning towards sources who want to stir up attention.

 

Consider this sentence again:

 

"But Mr. Craig´s return is a done deal, according to two people briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid conflicts with Eon and MGM."

 

If it is indeed a done deal, it will have been done by very few people who were sworn in to keep it a secret.  And Craig does not gain anything by having his agent tell the NYT.   

 

I don´t believe these "two people briefed on the matter", and if they wanted to avoid conflicts with EON and MGM they would not have said anything - because both parties will know exactly who knew about the deal if it had been done.

 

 

And this one from this "birth.movies.death"-website:

 

"On the less official front, I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close wth the production that the Broccolis are looking to do one more Bond then sell the franchise off, a la George Lucas/Star Wars/Disney."

 

"I have read thoughts from someone I believe to be close with the production"...  What?  Thought reading now?  He probably means that he read something on message boards.  Such as... ours, by the way, since we were talking about this possibility a few weeks ago.

 

Again, I don´t believe this.  EON will never sell Bond, BB is not old enough (as Lucas was) to step back completely.  She rather would extend the production capabilities of EON and, if not interested anymore, hand it over to the next generation within EON.  But selling Bond?  C´mon...

 

Well the admins at MI6-HQ:

https://twitter.com/...764296346836992

 

 

@bmoviesd would love to say there's nothing to this but we can't

Also about the NYT - they HARDLY EVER dabble in entertainment rumours etc. I doubt they'd run it if there wasn't something solid behind it. BMD isn't a dumb outlet either, not only they hardly ever run clickbait rumours unlike a lot of other blogs, the person who did that article is a well-versed Bond fan and of course he wouldn't have just been like 'oh people on the message boards said this'.

 

For some reason Bond fandom loves to crap on entertainment media when it comes to rumours etc (except Baz @ Daily Mail) - but just gotta remember who breaks the news. Page Six? Daily Mirror? of course huge mountains of salt. If it's coming from trade outlets like Variety, THR, Deadline - or from legitimate/not taboid outlets who hardly ever dabble in this stuff, there's gotta be something behind it. NYT had the news regarding the whole distribution bidding war a few months ago dammit haha. 

[Dustin]

Well, for the time being the NYT says it's done and the BBC says it's not... http://www.bbc.com/n...t-arts-40714425

So there, they're both not actually lightweights and I'd be inclined to think they're both having their reasons.

As for the bidding war, the actual news about it was not so much the fact itself - there's been speculation aplenty before about that - but that it's supposedly going for just BOND 25. How much of that turns out to be true I have no idea yet. From the sound of it this was very solid and I don't remember anybody really doubting either NYT or Variety on it.

This however, the 'rumour' that our colleague from Birth.Movies.Death now thinks may have the ring of truth to it...well, all I can say is some may find it believable and some may not. At the moment I don't. That's not to discredit Birth.Movies.Death or the NYT, or any other outlet. To me at the moment it just doesn't ring like a sound plan Eon would follow through with. If events post BOND 25 will prove me wrong there, fine.

[KHergesheimer]

There could be some truth to selling Eon. Hard to see where you go after Craig's departure: another reboot, go retro, carry on as normal? I think BB is probably interested in exploring other interests (theatre), MGW must be ready to retire, with one more Craig hit they will never get more $ from selling, the industry is evolving rapidly and it's getting tougher to create tentpole films that pull people into the theatre. Bond is one of those rare assets, and a Disney would love to get its hand on it. BB / Eon could stick around in Kathleen Kennedy type role to guard the brand, but the big bonuses would be: no more constantly waffling around with MGM and distribution partners, finally a Bond presence in some theme park(s), better merchandising, a meta verse play (SPECTRE or Felix Leiter series on Netflix), and regular production and film release schedule. Disney has proven they care about the brands they buy and can actually improve the product (Marvel, Star Wars....let's see about Indiana Jones) and have a machine in place to fully exploit those properties in a way pleasing to fans. What would suck about that? Eon get a ton of $ and creative control and continuity for once and we get more high quality films and more materials related to Bond on a REGULAR basis. I'm in.

[Hockey Mask]

I agree that if it's sold I would hope it went to Disney.

[Dustin]

There could be some truth to selling Eon. Hard to see where you go after Craig's departure: another reboot, go retro, carry on as normal? I think BB is probably interested in exploring other interests (theatre), MGW must be ready to retire, with one more Craig hit they will never get more $ from selling, the industry is evolving rapidly and it's getting tougher to create tentpole films that pull people into the theatre. Bond is one of those rare assets, and a Disney would love to get its hand on it. BB / Eon could stick around in Kathleen Kennedy type role to guard the brand, but the big bonuses would be: no more constantly waffling around with MGM and distribution partners, finally a Bond presence in some theme park(s), better merchandising, a meta verse play (SPECTRE or Felix Leiter series on Netflix), and regular production and film release schedule. Disney has proven they care about the brands they buy and can actually improve the product (Marvel, Star Wars....let's see about Indiana Jones) and have a machine in place to fully exploit those properties in a way pleasing to fans. What would suck about that? Eon get a ton of $ and creative control and continuity for once and we get more high quality films and more materials related to Bond on a REGULAR basis. I'm in.

Reasonable thinking there - until the part about Eon's creative control. Because that would not be all that different from the current state of affairs, Eon in the driving seat and the studio(s) shelling out. I suppose if a studio wants to buy Bond they will want just that driving seat position.

But even then it's intriguing to follow that train of thought. There is some charm in the possibilities a sale of Bond - in whole or in part - might offer, new ways to expand and earn money on a more reliable schedule than before. It's easy to see how one arrives at the conviction it's a good idea to sell. And if anybody can possibly arrive there, then so can Eon.

Let's assume the Eon-family did just that. They pondered their options for a time, maybe since SPECTRE, did their maths and came up with selling the show after BOND 25. That's certainly possible.

Now, how many people would possibly know of this watershed moment in Eon/Bond history? Not a lot. Maybe even just Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson who, for all we are aware of, are still the two deciding heads of the Eon enterprise. Would it make sense that this decision, supposedly still over 27 months away in the future, is already having effects on the here-and-now that professional rumour trackers could pick up on?

Only if somebody already started painting a huge price tag...

[DavidJones]

We know that Eon has never had a bigger hit than Skyfall. If they managed to deliver another hit on that scale - or even on the scale of Spectre, which was not too shabby either, don't forget - then it would be the perfect time to sell. Surely everyone knows that the best time to sell your property - either intellectual or physical - is when you're likely to get the best possible price ever offered.

 

I agree that there would be a lot riding on the new film but ... isn't there always? Casino Royale had to deliver too, and Goldeneye, and The Spy Who Loved Me. There would be no more added pressure than usual. Nobody wants to make a mediocre film. Maybe putting the date at November 2019 is a way of ensuring that the production will not be rushed. Work has begun on a script, almost two years before production is likely to begin. It seems they want to avoid the haste of recent entries.

 

A sale would mean a new film every two years at least. Maybe even every year. They may even be made by an actor who wants to do it and a company who are capable of delivering...

[Hockey Mask]

It would be sooooooo important that a new company keep the staples that make a Bond film a Bond film.

[DanMan]

It would be sooooooo important that a new company keep the staples that make a Bond film a Bond film.

I believe if someone like Disney were to buy the Bond franchise, we would get the most "traditional" Bond film since the 70's. Something along the lines of GF, TB, YOLT, TSWLM, etc... After decades of "peeling back the layers" I'd be 100% game for that. 
 

[Mr. Somerset]

It would be sooooooo important that a new company keep the staples that make a Bond film a Bond film.

Very true. My biggest concern would be some producer stepping in and buying into all the media bull that 007 needs to be changed to keep up with the PC and modern crowds. With the Broccoli's out of the way we might actually get a Jane Bond film or a change in Bond's ethnicity, nationality or sexual orientation.

Or it wouldn't surprise me to see a hip trendy American actor in the role- Chris Pine or Channing Tatum. With Eon out of the picture maybe the rules can be thrown out as well.

[Dustin]

Well, the whole series is a testament to Eon's way of handling Bond. But then again much of what we consider 'the rules' was made up by Eon over more than 50 years - and subject to change according to needs and musts. Eon themselves, old Eon at that, were quite open to an American in the role. And they had their eyes supposedly on just the hip trendy posterboys of yesteryear. So you never really know what waits behind the horizon...

I'm not one to criticise Eon for everything they do, even though I don't agree with some detail or other. On the whole they've done a stellar job with their franchise. But neither am I convinced they are the only player able to bring Bond successfully on the big screen. I would certainly be willing to see others give it a try - if there was a realistic chance they could do it.

[KHergesheimer]

Agree, I do think Eon has done a remarkable job overall, particularly BB's recent run. I can imagine missing them if they are not included moving forward. Would be better to have their stewardship and involvement in some capacity moving forward under any new ownership structure.

[Pussfeller]

I hope they keep it in the family. I guess it isn't inconceivable that they might sell the franchise the way Lucas did, but BB is no Lucas. 

[univex]

So the real news here is that we get to wait another full two years to see another mediocre (at best) storyline by the gruesome twosome. And that´s that.

 

Now comes speculation about the 51years old (by then) Craig returning or not; and about studio wars.

 

If 2014/2015 was a great time for being a Bond fan, now we´re lost at sea, drifting on currents and winds made by the splashing naked sunburned feet of people with money and little taste and knowledge. Blast.

 

But then again, if Craig returned for his YOLT-done-right, I´d be happy. One never learns. One still thinks one can dream.