It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
The general view if tge media at tge time were already hailing him as the best Bond ever after 1 movie.
By the die hard Bond fans, maybe but after CR, there were many media outlets hailing him as the best ever and even if that wasn't tge case, to say he was regarded as being far from the best just isn't true.
Surely you jest? A good successor to Brosnan? From an objective point of view Craig's performance in the opening scenes of CR superseded anything Brosnan had done in his 4 movies. If anything Craig highlighted how embarrassingly half arsed the era of 1995 to 2002 was.
I somewhat agree. It's a different kind of pressure SP is facing when compared to the pressures of CR. Craig is proven and has legitimately cemented himself as Bond and performance wise he always delivers. Unfortunately SP's preproduction stage was a shambles, unimpressive for the most part (regarding tge handling of the script and losing time on if Mendes will return or not). To be perfectly honest, as much as I love Bond and sincerely hope SP is a great movie and kills it at the BO, should the movie underperform critically and financially I hope the media rip the producers a new a-hole because they mismanaged the better part of their preproduction phase, which is just crucial and it's not like they don't have the experience of what goes into these movies and how things I'm principle should be done; nevermind living upto the challenges of the overwhelming goodwill of SF. Regardless, Craig isn't the problem. It doesn't matter who's in the lead playing Bond; if those fundamental factors at the preproduction stage are botched then the result will stay the same.
Mendes has announced in hood time he doesn't want to return, let's all watch how EoN are going to stupidly waste more time getting a new helmet and let's see how the script writing process is going to be squandered. Bloody hell.
[quote="doubleoego;474322"
I somewhat agree. It's a different kind of pressure SP is facing when compared to the pressures of CR. Craig is proven and has legitimately cemented himself as Bond and performance wise he always delivers. Unfortunately SP's preproduction stage was a shambles, unimpressive for the most part (regarding tge handling of the script and losing time on if Mendes will return or not). To be perfectly honest, as much as I love Bond and sincerely hope SP is a great movie and kills it at the BO, should the movie underperform critically and financially I hope the media rip the producers a new a-hole because they mismanaged the better part of their preproduction phase, which is just crucial and it's not like they don't have the experience of what goes into these movies and how things I'm principle should be done; nevermind living upto the challenges of the overwhelming goodwill of SF. Regardless, Craig isn't the problem. It doesn't matter who's in the lead playing Bond; if those fundamental factors at the preproduction stage are botched then the result will stay the same.
Mendes has announced in hood time he doesn't want to return, let's all watch how EoN are going to stupidly waste more time getting a new helmet and let's see how the script writing process is going to be squandered. Bloody hell.
[/quote]
Good post. It's exactly how I feel. EON and Mendes just totally mismanaged their preproduction period, letting the lousy script just rot until the last possible minute. They almost don't deserve a great film success, they so bungled this process. We obviously all hope for the best, but for a film this huge, it was just inexcusable. The unfair thing is that Mendes and EON are to blame for this mess if this thing under performs, but it will be Craig that the press will bash for it. Actors get too much credit for the big hits, and sometimes too much blame for the misses. At least Craig can sit home and count all his money.
Good post. It's exactly how I feel. EON and Mendes just totally mismanaged their preproduction period, letting the lousy script just rot until the last possible minute. They almost don't deserve a great film success, they so bungled this process. We obviously all hope for the best, but for a film this huge, it was just inexcusable. The unfair thing is that Mendes and EON are to blame for this mess if this thing under performs, but it will be Craig that the press will bash for it. Actors get too much credit for the big hits, and sometimes too much blame for the misses. At least Craig can sit home and count all his money.
[/quote]
Precisely! It's aggravating and worse yet you'd think the producers are smart and careful enough to approach making these movies more seriously. Waiting for Mendes as annoying as it was I could sort of understand but the script left unchecked for so long that they even had to rehire the guys they fired to come back and fix the script in record time is just crazy.
Perhaps we have to give Eon some understanding. I've never made a 200 - 300 million dollar film, I doubt anyone here has. I'm sure the pressure - be it financial, emotional - can, at times, be intense. And we're all human so you can't expect perfect scripts or whatever. All fans should want a Bond film to be 7 out of 10. Obviously we'd like a 10 or a 9 but Eon, like the rest of us, are just regular people trying their best with the resources they've got. Expecting everything to go perfectly well without any hitches or mistakes is not that realistic, I reckon.
Not sure about that. The fact that they spend 300 million or possibly more on SP is proof that they have lost control completely over finances. I'm sorry, but with all due respect to EON something is wrong. Look at other big budget movies. For 300 million you can produce a Cameron level movie easily.
QOS, SF, or SP should not cost more than 150 million without changing anything.
Cost control is obviously not in the vocabulary of EON anymore.
As for planning ahead...they fail repeatedly. Waiting for a director to return???
Something that would be unthinkable with other franchises.
Just look how other production companies can plan up to 4 movies ahead including budget and release date and keep them!
If EON was a normal production company some people would long have been sacked. Probably after QOS or Skyfall.
Because the billion dollar that Skyfall made doesn't excuse how out of control costs have gone for Skyfall as well.
Am I mad with Broccoli/Wilson?.
I am eternally grateful for everything good they have done, but I can be critical of them anyway and any reasonable person should be.
Because if they continue like that a Bond movie will come that bombs at the box office and then the franchise could indeed be dead. We are not in the year 1989 anymore.
Spectre is Skyfall Part 2.
Depending on how one is perceiving Skyfall either this is a good thing or not.
Personally I believe that Spectre has the potential to be as good as CR. CR had it's flaws too story wise, but that wasn't really an issue with everything else being as perfect as can be.
EON has produced 23 Bond movies so far. None of them has bombed. NONE. They would need to produce at least 5 bombs in a row to destroy the franchise.
Licence To Kill was perceived as a flop.
With the cost of today's movies even a James Bond movie can be a disaster financially.
Doesn't matter how many movies a production company has made.
Licence to Kill made (iirc) about $155m off a $30m budget. That may be bottom end in the context of Bond, but it's far from a flop.
I said "was perceived as a flop" not it was a flop. Up to now every Bond film has made profit.
That didn't destroy the franchise, though. The six year gap took into account many factors. Regard budgets, if EON can get away with murder they will. They're very financially stable and hold a very lucrative IP. If people want to give them money to fritter that's not their problem. They'll try and get as much as they can while the going is good and adjust when it isn't. I don't see any problems on the horizon other than something I've heard regard 'other projects' which may mean the Bond's are a minimum three year turnaround still.
Fortunately, so far on paper and from the footage we've seen SP isn't going to be SF2. One of the best comments Mendes has made about this movie is that him returning to direct meant that the film wasn't going to be SF2 and so far so good.
Sure, it's predominantly the same core cast/crew and there are certain themes being carried over but in the grand scheme of things SP is going to be very different from SF. Just look at DN and FRWL; same core cast/crew where there are similarities but also major differences that make the movies very unique and distinguishable.
I like SF but I'm not that enthusiastic about it. In terms of overall quality I'm hoping SP to be at least as good as CR, which I think is Craig's best outing thus far. Either be as good as CR or top it. I don't want anything less.
I agree absolutely. I'm not enthusiastic about SF either. But CR is my No 4 Bond movie after GE TLD and OHMSS.
CR is the level Spectre has to be on or of course top it in the best case.
That's a highly respectable top 4 ranking
:D
My feelings too. SF should have been Craig's last film if Logan and Mendes were so set on playing out the aging agent scenario. It's almost illogical to have SP come after SF, but if we get a rejuvenated Bond, its a big improvement over a SF2. I can re watch CR any time, but I had to make myself watch SF for the third time and it has not aged well with me. So I too hope we we get back to the CR Bond.
Gala Brand in the novel did not even ended up with him. And again, in the novel Tiffany Case pretty much breaks up with him (although it is of a common agreement). So I would see this happening in a movie. I'd actually love to see what happens to a Bond girl after the credits roll.
I think Craig will do the TGWTDT sequel before he return for another Bond.
Some, myself included, just don't like Craig as Bond for whatever reason.
=)) Post of the day!
It really depends on Spectre. Assuming neither Craig nor BB really know how to continue after Spectre it is all uncertain.
I'm convinced Spectre will be less flawed than Skyfall and actually has a shot of being the best Bond movie ever, which Skyfall could have easily been without the missteps.
After the best Bond ever it would be hard to let go of Craig, no matter how old he is.
But if they continue with him they absolutely have to build his age into the story and not just pretend he is still a young, fresh 00 agent in his prime that has inner angsts.