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
I am actually glad they gave her a proper send off. Much better than Bernard Lee's, although I always thought Messervy never left and Robert Brown was one and the same.
where did I say SF is failure?? Anybody who dislikes the Craig era must be automatically be a Brosnan/Moore fan??
The 50+ year series is currently not to my liking as I find the last two installments a disappointment as one has an unfinished and Bourne wannabee flavor about it by a poorly suited director for the franchise and the next director came with a story that is about the characters and not so much about the story driving them because frankly that one has more holes in it than Moore's Moonrakers can fly through. ;)
For me the Craig era is a letdown because after CR I was so in awe with him, and his 007 is different and decent enough but his movies are letting him down for me.
And when somebody talks BO is grade of quality by the paying audience than sadly Titanic and Avatar a twice the quality of of SF and the audiences have spoken with their wallet too. But actually BO is often the result of a good PR or great marketing strategy which SF actually had, that moment at the Olympics was shere brilliance and funnier than SF had to offer at any moment. [ there is a decent director at work ;) ]
For me on the basis of SF Mendes does not warrant a third movie, SP could change that but I have yet to see the movie to give judgement on that matter. As for the teaser trailer it left me underwhelmed, which is how I prefer trailers when they do not give away too much.
I want Craig to have a movie as good as CR minus any sinking buildings and he has yet to get that.
If I could wipe one element of the internet out it would be that, it's used to excess and you all just look like children.
I love this argument . The idea that just because SF has themes and is 'complex', then ergo it must be brilliant. The history of cinema is littered with the wrecks of high -concept, complex, richly thematic movies that stunk. I'm not saying that themes and complexity are bad, but just that , as with the inclusion of action or sex, they don't in themselves make a good film.
Skyfall may well be one of the most complex Bond movies ever made, but that in itself doesn't make it good.
Not "must be." But is for many. Furthermore, it isn't just a matter of theme. The cinematography, art direction, performances, and music are all first-rate. And while some may poo-poo the plot, fact is, this is Bond we're talking about. Very few if any of the films have realistic, strong plotlines. Most of the films are fluff, and we the fluff. But SF isn't fluff.
So, if you leave the theater and think "The old Bonds are the best", it means Mendes delivered :)
Interesting spin on SF! In that case he did indeed succeed!
Daniel Craig has announced that he will retire as 007 after the next two Bond films.
So if Time is believed Craig will be bond till bond 26 :D 6 films total which I think would be a perfect run
When did he announce this officially?
http://variety.com/2015/film/news/james-bond-distribution-rights-up-for-grabs-1201509566/
If they were to be believed, two more films would surely be SP and 25. Not that it matters, they've clearly just made it up.
It may be the last Sony Bond film, but that report doesn't say anything about Craig continuing or not?
Craig era started with Sony, it would make sense that this series, especially as interconnected as it is, ends with Sony. Having Craig's story continue on to non-Sony Bonds could cause complications - closes example is Universal essentially holding Hulk rights in the Disney/Marvel films and the deal regrading that.
If B25 and beyond are Sony then that's all fine. But if it they aren't, I can see Craig ending here with SPECTRE.
Posted about this in another topic a few weeks ago, MGM still 100% owns United Artists and after recoverying to a healthy position MGM are ready to become a studio again. This is good new for Bond and EON. We have seen the emails from Sony. Sony had far to much say in how the films were being made and were pushy when it came to what Sony product they could push to feature in the films. MGM I expect will be more standoffish and let EON get on with it. Gary Barber has done a fantastic job of turning MGM in to stable business again.
But you need to take into account the story implications of that and Craig staying on under another studio. It's undeniable that Sony have crafted a Bond equivalent of Nolan's Dark Knight series. Sure Craig may stay on but in terms of story if it's under another studio this will most likely be be just like M between the Brosnan and Craig films, her playing the same character but in a different timeline/universe, a "soft reboot" if you will, no connection to the CR/QoS/SF/SP series.
Don't see the need to do that. The rights have not changed. End of the day this is no big deal Sony were only ever on for 10%. Lets not forget this is the Sony who tried to cut Dan out the deal on the use of the mobile phone in Spectre, the same Sony who's leaked emails showed us they were pushing for Idris Elba. I don't think there will be much love lost between Craig and Sony after the leaks. I think the move will be pretty seemless for the fan. MGM have a good relationship with Disney's buena vista pictures. There are options Bond offers a good return for its initial investment.
Actually the studio will have an effect on the story - this will all depend on the deal they broker, if it's something like the Paramount/Disney deal for the MCU movies pre-Avengers and all the films Avengers onwards being Disney, then it would be fine. There are like I said complications with Marvel at the moment regarding the Hulk because when that movie came out it was distributed by Universal and not Paramount which ended up putting a roadblock on any Disney/Marvel solo Hulk film because of the deal they agreed on.
Did it matter when it was Marvel Studios making the Incredible Hulk film with Universal distributing?
Like I said all depends on the deal they broker. Among the issues would be actually when trying to package/release the Craig films in one set and so forth or when say the new studio would want to organise marathon showings of the previous Craig films before midnight screenings of B25. More complicated when you have to not just deal with whatever studio distributing B25 but also Sony because of the previous films too.
If it's like Disney getting to distribute the Paramount-released Marvel Studios titles (Iron Man to Captain America) I.e. the new studio having distribution rights to the previous Craig Bonds as well.as the future ones, then it will all be fine.
I was amazed at these leak items. Craig selected both the director and Bardem without EON's initial input, had a big hand in the script, and as an actor he has carried his Bond films. He is probably far more responsible for the success of the last 3 Bonds than Wilson. And given he apparently had the same mobile endorsement deal on SF, this Sony director in the leak was in effect proposing they cut his salary by $5m after he carried SF to over 1B. Then of course you have that idiot, Amy Pascal, firing off that PR bonanza for Elba. Craig must consider Sony honchos a bunch of disloyal, back stabbing scumbags, and I would bet that if EON wants him badly to continue with 25, Sony must know they have created an influential enemy.
Also, a thought about EON and Bond 25. I think they will desperately want Craig to continue, IF SP is a hit for 2 very different reasons. His carrying Bond to big BO is one thing, but if Craig leaves after SP, EON could face a huge amount of political pressure in the US to hire Elba, and I have no doubt that they badly want to avoid that scenario for a number of reasons. Keeping Craig on through B25 will greatly help them avoid that choice given Elba's age when it comes time to recast for 26.
A lot of conjecture. Surely our focus should be on SP at this point? My main concern is that being a great film, everything else is secondary, especially things that are years away.
They were not pushing for Idris Elba. What happened is that Amy Pascal wrote an e-mail stating that she thinks Elba should be the next Bond...