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
@tanaka123, because there are separate DC/Marvel threads that are much better reserved for discussing that.
I don't have a problem with comparing said franchises with Bond in terms of overall strategy, production and planning but I couldn't give the slightest toss about how much BvS makes and care even less about schoolchild Marvel v DC spats.
As @Creasy47 says go to the relevant thread if you want to debate this rubbish.
News items as of March 2016:
-Rumors spark that Spectre and Bond 25 will share a two story arc, according to a report from Film Divider. Speculation suggests that Léa Seydoux and Christoph Waltz have signed on to reprise their roles, though the accuracy of these rumors is questioned
June 2015
-Variety reports that the distribution rights for the Bond franchise will be up for grabs following Spectre's release and Sony's departure from the series, and lists Warner Bros. as a viable candidate due to their recent partnerships with MGM on films such as the Hobbit franchise and the upcoming "Creed"
July 2015
-Sam Mendes reveals he will not direct any more Bonds after Spectre, making it unlikely for Bond 25 to be a direct sequel to its predecessor
August 2015
-Daniel Craig confirms in an interview he has no plans for the next 2 years, but is considering some theater work in NY, opening up the possibility for another 3 year gap
September 2015
-When asked in an interview for Esquire whether he'd be open to doing a 5th film in his tenure, Craig responds with, "At this moment, no. I have a life and I’ve got to get on with it a bit. But we’ll see.”
October 2015
-Daniel Craig hints in numerous interviews that he'll likely return for Bond 25, but is quoted as 'needing a break.'
-A questionable rumour from Express.co.uk suggests that the series' 25th entry will be a period film, with it being set in the 60s
-Spectre's ending sets us up for a return of a few key cast members
November 2015
-Following Spectre's critical success, Sam Mendes doesn't rule out making his Bond helm a trilogy
-Craig more or less confirms he will be back for Bond 25, saying he is 'not gone yet.'
-In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, producer Michael G. Wilson confirms that a new distributor for the franchise will be chosen sometime near February 2016; also reconfirms a likely return for Craig
-Michael G. Wilson hints at another 3 year gap
-Producer Barbara Broccoli reveals development on B25 could begin sometime near Spring 2016
-Léa Seydoux admits to the press she has not been asked to return for B25, but would love to if given the opportunity
-Daniel Craig is announced to play Iago alongside David Oyelowo in the upcoming "Othello" in 2016, which may interfere with his role in the development of B25
December 2015
-The Mirror stirs rumours that director Guy Ritchie of The Man from UNCLE fame has been tipped to helm Bond 25, after the producers allegedly enjoyed the film
January 2016
-According to reports, Christoph Waltz has signed on to reprise his role as Ernst Stavro Blofeld for two more consecutive Bond films, as long as Craig returns as Bond
-Multiple tabloids claim a similar story in which the producers have offered Daniel Craig to film both Bond 25 and 26 back to back, due to his requests for time off
-While on the Graham Norton show, Ralph Fiennes revealed he will return for another and possibly penultimate time as Bond's boss
February 2016
-Daniel Craig is reported to star in a Todd Field directed limited series adaptation of Jonathan Franzen's Purity
-Daniel Craig's reps confirm he is not "quitting" the role of Bond, despite reports from The Sun that claim otherwise
-Associate producer Gregg Wilson states that creative work for B25 has yet to begin, but that as far as he is concerned, Craig is still Bond
-Wilson also states that they have begun to look for the next real world threat to center a B25 plotline around
-In another likely attempt to stir rumors, The Sun reports that both EoN and MGM are desperate to keep Craig in the role, and are willing to delay B25 to accommodate for his involvements in other plans
-Actor Mark Strong, a close friend of Daniel Craig, is quoted as saying he thinks Craig is done with the role
-The producers are reportedly eyeing Croatia, particularly Dubrovnik, as a filming location for B25 according to Croatian newspaper Croatia Week, after franchises like Game of Thrones and Star Wars had filmed in the country
March 2016
-Multiple outlets report that Poldark's Aidan Turner has been tipped to succeed Daniel Craig as James Bond, and has been rather coy when asked to comment in interviews
-At the Empire Awards, Sam Mendes states that he is still unsure about whether Craig will return or not. "I think you’ve got to feel 100% to come back, and I think he knows that. He needs to have a break and do another role and see how he feels after that. I’ll be watching with as much interest as you guys."
-At an MGM conference call, CEO Gary Barber confirms that Bond films will be released on a three-to-four year cycle; also states that there is 'no rush' for making a distribution deal
-Ben Whishaw states in an interview that he thinks Craig will return
-The Mirror reports that producer Barbara Broccoli is set on The Night Manager's Tom Hiddleston as Craig's replacement, but is likely building on previous rumours
-Tom Hiddleston denies having ever had discusstions with EoN about possibly succeeding Craig as Bond
@TheWizardOfIce I don't care about any of that either - never being into Marvel or DC. I don't want to debate that rubbish so I won't be going to that thread, if you thought I had slightest interest in any of that nonsense.
Phew that's a relief @tanaka123 because I can't tell you the amount of sleepless nights I've had wondering how much you care about comic book franchises.
We know that but wait and see :-)
Heh. Tell me about it. And those references usually run upwards of 500 words. Blimey.
(:|
Looking forward, the Ben Hur remaking is being released by Paramount for MGM.
if they had brought Broz back for a 5th film, the chances are in the higher percentile that they would've continued on, business as usual.... MGW even said as much on one of the CR featurettes back in the day.... did they realize that DAD wasn't on point for where they thought the franchise should be heading - especially after the fan backlash to the film?.. yes.. but it also made a shit ton of money, and Pierce was still a very well liked Bond....
in EON's mind, the only way to properly do CR justice, was to take it all the way back to the beginning - which would've meant a very stripped down Bond film, and a Bond at the beginning of his career - this was Cubby's plan in the mid 80's, but they couldn't acquire the rights, so they went on to make TLD instead..... so flash forward to 2004 there was no way they were going to do CR with Pierce still onboard.... you are correct to a point - it wasn't all just because of CR - but it was also because of CR, the tonal shift was allowed to take place..
and with Bond 25, i am not saying that we could be getting the 2018 version of DAD - if Dan's still onboard, i don't think he let's his Bond become a farce like that one... but just don't be surprised if it's something more directly in line with SP, than CR... that's all i am saying.
Not that I want to spoil anyone's enjoyment of the tense excitement of a company dong a deal with another company for distribution rights of their product but do we really need to be putting speculation of MGM buying the rights to Bond in spoiler tags?
Are there really people on here whose lives are so empty they would be gutted if they read it on here the day before EON announced it?
I guess. The Craig era started out deconstructing Bond. Now it is about reconstructing.
quite...
i've often wondered how much influence do us fans really have on the series?... There has to be a little bit - not enough to evoke sweeping changes, but enough for the producers to maybe think twice on any choices they might initially make.... because starting with CR, everything seemed to be (as you put it) about deconstructing the character of Bond - but after two films, it seems as though the fans got sick of that, and wanted something more "traditional"... and gradually the producers started bringing that back - starting with SF and into SP... but it seems there is a large contingent of fans that doing this, seems to tick them off - and they would've rather stuck with the style and tone of CR or QOS...... granted, i do believe at the end of the day, all us fans want is a dynamite script and story - tone is a close 2nd..... but i wonder if BB and MGW, if they were to ever read these boards over the past 5 years, have ever pulled their hair out saying "what in the hell do these people want??" lol.
No, it was Michael G. Wilson's plan. Albert R. Broccoli vetoed it. (Source: Inside The Living Daylights documentary).
Speaking only for myself, I put my response in spoiler tags because the question was inside spoiler tags. Overly cautious on my part.
And to create an air of mystery and awe :D
Really what on earth made you think that I care about comic book franchises my friend @TheWizardOfIce - i haven't discussed them really? Only to mention a fact about how much money Batman v Superman, of which I'm not all that interested. It's not me who's talking about comic book franchises. The only one I've seen is the Avengers Assemble.
That, too :-)
Lots. Put another way: If you were footing the bill, how much would you want? :-)
More seriously, the question is how heavy handed the studios (which foot the bill) are. Some studio executives are interested in being collaborative and aren't dictators. Others, not so much. Things vary by the people involved.
in terms of Bond.... creative direction / story / casting - that is all still EON, with probably a little bit of say from MGM... but not a lot where there would be internal power struggles between the two - at the end of the day, it's still EON's call... MGM, while still having 50% ownership, I have always viewed as more facilitators....... the same can be said, but to a less extent with whatever new studio they find to fork over half of the production budget and distribution... they'll have enough say to make some influential decisions - but at the end of the day, no new studio or even MGM have the power, or say-so to veto creative decisions made by EON.
i could've sworn it was the other way around - from what i remember off of the CR bonus stuff... i could be wrong, it has been a while since i watched it.... i just remember Cubby wanting to CR from the very beginning, but never was able to get the rights to it - and he tried again in the 80's, but failed once more..
it depends on the working relationship..
the working relationship between EON and MGM has always been really good - at least to the point where MGM (at least since i have been aware) hasn't tried to powerplay EON into making wholesale changes to their scripts, casting decisions, or crew.. since '95 - at least - things seem to be really good between those 2..
now, the relationship between EON/MGM and Sony for the past almost 10 years had been quite good - even after Sony had been downgraded to half producers/distributors after MGM bought back their Bond shares in the late 2000's ((yes, it did happen - this was before MGM's financial fiasco, they decided to still honor the contract of keeping Sony on through Bond's 23 and 24 though.... but then, the sh*t hit the fan financially... but thats another story.)).... Once Amy Pascal was ousted, i think things really seemed to sour between Sony and EON/MGM, and where Sony was probably in the right in regards to their requests for 3rd act rewrites on SP - I am not how EON took to their constant requests for change or revisions ((keep in mind, this was really the first time we were ever exposed to something like this going on behind the scenes - for all we know, this could be a pretty standard practice in the film industry - an ugly part of filmmaking that one likes to talk about... not every film goes off, production wise, without a hitch.))........ but, Sony has made a bad habit in recent history in terms of their 'creative meddling', and at the end of the day, it's really started to hurt their bottom line - to the point where they have become a fledgling studio, who is barely keeping it's head above water... i wouldn't trust Sony with any tentpole property at this point - they did an awesome job of running Spider-man into the ground, to the point where Marvel no longer trusts their decision making, and badly wants to regain full control over that property (2 reboots in 7 years? ouch)....
:))
On the Inside The Living Daylights documentary, it's stated that Albert R. Broccoli didn't want to look back, but keep moving forward. So Maibaum and Wilson devised the story line we eventually saw.
Having said that, I'm sure Broccoli kept looking into to getting the Casino Royale rights.