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
1. She doesn't appear in B25 because her relationship with Bond has ended. In that case, who in the hell wants a spinoff of her? She's out of Bond's world, so who would even remotely care about her? I guess you could make it about her youth when she was still living with her father, but that makes it a Mr White spinoff, doesn't it? So that's a no-go.
2. She shows up in B25 because her romance with Bond is real and thus will be integral to the plot of the the next Bond film. In this 2nd case, who in the hell (again) cares for such a film? We'd be watching Madeleine and Bond every day life before the events of B25? I don't have time to watch that, and even if i did, if EON, Craig and Seydoux seriously have that much time and money to spend making this, then how about they just work on Bond 25 instead and stop wasting time on such nonsense?
What really makes me shiver is that there might be people in the movie industry that think just like you. Truly nightmare inducing stuff.
Well, that's what I've been asking myself. Certainly a new distributor doesn't want a shit-deal that Sony used to have. They barely profited from the box office success of SF. So reason that we still don't know the new distribution partner, is because the negotiations could be tense and could be about so much more than just a distribution deal. Solving all the particulars of such a deal could potentially take much more time. So yes, it could delay Bond #25.
By the way, I have written my first news article for the Dutch James Bond fanclub "James Bond Nederland". I tipped those uncertainties in my article. Feel free to read it (with Google Translate):
http://www.jamesbond.nl/nieuwe-bieders-distributierechten-james-bond/
@DarthDimi , @Creasy47 , @ggl007 , @M_Balje , @bondjames , @RC7 :-).
Agreed. But it's also important to note that EON Productions themselves should show become the perfect patron of James Bond again. And lately I just feel that EON Productions....grew tired of the franchise. With all those 'wonderful' side-productions, from “Othello” to “Once”, from “Chariots Of Fire” to “Film Stars Don’t Die In Liverpool”, from “Nancy” the spy-flick “The Rhytmn Section”. It's all lovely. And each and individual production could be wonderful. But it eventually takes away time from Bond. That's a plain fact. Not only that, EON used to have a much greater creative control over the franchise. At times, especially the past two decades, it feels that they have become too liberal with their business model. "Cubby" Broccoli would turn in his grave when he reads this news... But it does fit the other 'gossip' news that Barbara and Michael want to sell the Bond franchise after Bond #25.
Ooowh? "As usual" no less. I must be quite the crap contributor on here then ;-).
WOAH I never said I want anything but decent bond films and video games I am just saying if I HAVE to have a Bond Cinimatic universe the above makes the most sense
Well, we have to admit that the only Bond movie spin-offs that even remotely make sense are what @Risico007 listed there. Young Bond, WW2 Bond and Period Piece Bond are the only spinoffs that can technically be taken seriously as they are Bond-centered films. Whether they are good ideas or not is another discussion, but any Bond related movie without Bond featured in it makes no sense whatsoever.
Come on, they could also do a Jinx spin-off.
Same with me.
You know, one of the most ideal scenario's would be if Warner Bros. could buy MGM completely, making Warner the full 50% owner of James Bond 007. Warner will then do everything: Finance and distribution. EON Productions is owning the other half and is doing all creative and production related things. MGM, which is fully eaten by hedgefund dogs, is finally dead. And then in a later stage there could be a separate TV deal with either Apple or Amazon.
Same with main villains - how many of them featured in Bond films since 1962 could carry their own film?
What about MI6 characters like Q, M, MP, Tanner? We have half the forums members having nervous breakdown whenever any of these characters have too much screen time. MP and Q have what, 10/15 minutes of screen time in SF/SP? And that is already too much for some members. How can side characters that some people can't stand more than 10 minutes per Bond film could possibly carry a 2 hours film?
Thanks! I understand you quoted Barbara saying she likes the Marvel universe? Do you have a link?
Totally agree with this.
On the other hand, I would love to see a Bond tv show. My top choice would be period-piece adaptations of Fleming's novels (this is a pretty good outline) and Colonel Sun, but even if they revolved around Bond's service in WW2 or Young Bond (this would be my least favourite choice, actually) I would still watch them.
A Bond spinoff is, I'm sure, financially viable for an Amazon or Netflix and the fact that none of us want it wouldn't stop joe public tuning in.
I would think that is what they term by under exploited not flogging Star Wars levels of merchandise.
The Corgi DB5 in 1964/65 and GE64 are the only times Bond products have come close to Star Wars sales levels and the first was the height of Bondmania and the second was a fabulous product that happened to be Bond branded.
You can stick the Star Wars logo on a turd and it will sell but this doesn't work with Bond (although SP made a reasonable amount of money!)
Spin offs I can see them doing, Bond produce coming at you from all angles not going to happen.
FFS the market for Bond products is so non existent that Corgi couldn't even be arsed to rebox a load of old models in 50th anniversary packaging. Now I know Corgi leave a lot to be desired but even a company as clueless as them must have run the numbers and thought its just not worth it for the couple of hundred models we'll flog to MI6 members.
I'm saving that!
Well I'm assuming that this would all be done with EON handing the baton over to a team of producers and writers much like the Marvel universe and Babs and MGW would be executive producers or some such.
The sticking point they no doubt have with sealing the new distribution deal I would imagine is that people are saying 'Either you flog the horse harder so we get some profit more often or you give us a bigger slice of the pie when a Bond film rolls around.'
Bottom line is no one is going to sign up for the shitty deal Sony had where they basically risked millions to make their money back with just enough profit to buy a bag of Maltesers.
Maybe they will want a Bond film every 2 years but still slot a spin off in between them.
On top of that, we have the shameful waste of money (what was it, £24m?) on rubbish car chases and lord knows how much on Guinness book explosions and what not.
There are ways to do things more efficiently in a market where box office is collapsing (and is increasingly unpredictable), and I'm quite certain this is part of the ongoing discussion, along with ways to extract more pounds of flesh from this puppy. A cleaner corporate structure would certainly help too.
I must admit, @Gustav_Graves, I had a great time reading your article! Very insightful and well written. :-) Well done, mate.
Dont shoot the messenger but the advantage of spin off filling the time gaps: trying to explore slightly different markets, different styles, being able to kill off characters without affecting the main franchise (this could actually lead to more tension?), if a certain direction does not work, they can dump it quickly, if characters work, they can crossover into mainstream Bond.
obviously there are downsides to spin offs (well documented in this thread) but Im just trying to balance the debate.
Re previous characters, these were never disigned to spin off and none that I can think of work (perhap Felix?) , best to create new characters that are designed to spin off from the start so you get a more integrated , smooth narative rather than a clumsy bolt on.
They could even put a character into a main Bond and test the water to see how audiences react to the character and actor/actress (Jinx was just annoying). If feedback is good and the audience seem to have an emotional connection/interest, then you could have potential. If not, they have lost nothing.
To have Bond working alongside another double O agent has been done before (GE) and I think it worked well IMHO. I would be gobsmacked if execs at Amazon/Apple are not having the same discussions.
Final thought: what do we think M does ? especially the traditional role. He manages a team of double 0 agents. It's a very easy concept for mainstream audience to grasp. They introduced Alec very quickly and put him in the thick of the action and everyone just "got" who he was.
"Ready to save the World again? After you, double 0 six" and thats it, thats all the exposition needed. Just by having a double 0 name, it brings all of the history/culture of the "Bond Universe".