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 can imagine there is some pressure on the Bond people to get a film to market soon to capitalize on the brand equity. I can also imagine that extracting maximum value out of this franchise on a go-forward basis is going to be something executives will be discussing and insisting on, given the polarization in the market.
Regarding Villeneuve: I think the BR2049 scenario is going to hurt his stock somewhat. He was already tight for time as we know given his other commitments, but the film's performance may lead them in another direction.
And further, those in the industry knew that marketing this (especially domestically), was an uphill battle as soon as the project was greenlit. And then, as you quite rightly point out, @bondjames, the advertising seemed to be centered on Ford.
Well, the people going out to see Ford, were going out to see this film anyways (us old fogies); once we knew Ford was in it: cherry on top.
They shoulda gone after the younger demos and females... but... then again... when you think about the film, bondjames, what is there, in the story/film, that would appeal to these groups-- Gosling, to an extent, but what else?... There's a little Bautista (but he's effective for little screen time...); there's no real zest and balls-to-the-wall action...
It really feels like an impossible film to market to all demos...
But, getting back to Villeneuve, when industry people, critics and audiences are saying "Masterpiece", his stock still hovers high (and I would bet, higher by a smidge, post BR 2049 release).
No matter how we slice and dice it, Villeneuve's outing failed to live up to Warner's stated expectations. Ultimately, Bond is gold. Whoever gets this distribution deal is going to want to knock B25 out of the park because there are so few sure things available to extract value from now.
So at the very least, they will ponder Villeneuve. Given his busy schedule, I don't see people running after him to make it work in the manner they may have done had the film been a bigger success.
Distribution deals are based on complex negotiations and, as the conversations advance between the parties, the deal either comes together or it falls apart. So again, with due respect to you and your beliefs, the deal making, at this very high level, is not swayed by just sticking a lead actor on a TV show to express his enthusiasm for a role. Craig announced his return because he had obviously officially agreed to come back as Bond, and the first thing Eon would have done, once Craig was back onboard, would have been to confirm their lead actor with whoever they were (or still are) negotiating with. Why? Because it gives Eon more leverage in the deal making. A studio distribution deal is based on a very, very detailed agreement ( I won't even try to express just how complex such a the deal might be and how long it can last ) - and that deal making takes time, especially with a very strong production company like Eon who have a firm grip of the gold (they basically own Bond) which the distributors want a cut of. Eon obviously agreed with Craig he should announce his return by himself on live tv for all the (possible) reasons we have discussed. That won't, as you seem to want to believe, have impact on the "small print" of the deal. It just isn't that simple.
But, sorry to harp on this, but BR 2049 is an outlier to this convention. Insiders think the DV's a genius. This man's dance card is full.
And, if he doesn't do B25, I have to believe it will be he, and not the producers/distributors pulling out; it will be him saying that one project is better for his career trajectory than the other (although in more diplomatic terms).
BR 2049 is unlike anything I've seen recently, insofar as a BO dud; it's loved and spoken only well of-- everyone, EVERYONE, has blamed the BO results on ANYTHING but Villeneuve, his cast, script, art direction, photography, costume, music...-- which means, as Deadline stated: marketing failed to captured the demos they wanted.
But when I think about the film, I'd say you'd hafta be a marketing outlier yourself to have a smash hit.
Christ, even the studio back-tracked and said their projections may've been ambitious, since this was a very hard sell.
Not one bad word about Denis in the mainstream reporting; not one anonymous "source" that's planted to deflect blame off the big boys, and onto Villeneuve.
Like I said, any other film that's a BO dud, and I would 100% agree that the director would take a pounding, his stock would fall, people would be wary of signing over $150 million again.
But no one will be gun-shy of opening up the vault to Denis based on BR's BO.
I'm not saying you're wrong about your reasoning, @bondjames , but this film is an outlier, and, right now, Denis is untouchable (not one serious bad comment has been made about him; compare that to Snyder after his first SM film (and it got uglier after BM v SM)).
He did it for a reason, after denying it earlier in the day. The publicity for what was to break on Colbert only kicked in during that day itself, as I recall. Earlier in the day, all of us believed what he was saying on the radio shows, which was that he was undecided. So it didn't appear to be something that was pre-planned in advance to perfection. Some media outlets the next day were still picking up the morning news in their headlines (basically that he was still unsure). It was a confused message (I did the google check the next morning). Why did he do it that way? Your guess (and I'm sure you'll agree that all you have is just a guess) is as good as mine. I actually inferred in my earlier post that I believe his surprise announcement increases EON's leverage with the distributor. It also helps Craig. Quoted again, for your reference:
As far as I'm aware you're not part of the negotiation team on this deal. As I recall, you were suggesting some time back that it was done and that a director likely had been hired, which doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm sure you'll agree that some of this stuff is moving in an unusual fashion. Believe me, I do recognize that the negotiations take time to finalize and I've never suggested otherwise. That is the case with any multi-$M deal of this nature in any business, and I have been involved with such deals in other industries.
You have as much actual knowledge of why that announcement was made and when it was made as the rest of us do. The rest is just conjecture on your part as well, although admittedly from a more knowledgeable and experienced position. So I'd greatly appreciate it if you could please allow us the opportunity to speculate here with you until we know facts for sure. Then you're welcome to school me, with the deepest respect.
I don't enter into these kind of discussion in any detail because I haven't a clue but the Internet has made everyone a so called experts. There is no real effort involved you just google it and the add your own moneys worth which a lot of the time is a bunch of hot air.
Instead of accepting that somone else might know more than you and be in a better place to talk about this, you say you are obviously more experienced in this world but excuse me while I have the last word with my fan boy musings on the subject.
There was a time when people respected the experts and listened but now we live in the era of ignoring experience and half baked hypotheisies are seen as alternative facts why is it no surprise that everyone thinks there opinion is more valid than the facts or actual experience.
We are at the mercy of armchair experts.
There are elements of @ColonelSun's posts that offer his knowledge and insight into the process. I have acknowledged that in a previous post and continue to do so.
However, he is interspersing that with his opinion, interpretation and speculation. He has been wrong in the past when offering his opinion, as have all of us including most of all myself (that's the thing about opinions - they're often as wrong as much as they can be right).
Nobody here truly knows the facts about why Craig made that announcement the way he did (with earlier denials in the morning which could have been very easily eliminated via a scheduling change). Some may choose to take his explanation at face value and think this is all part of EON operating at the top of their marketing game via a coordinated effort, as has been suggested. Others, myself included, think it could have been done in a better way.
---
@peter, regarding Villeneuve, I don't disagree from a recognition and fame standpoint. I'm just commenting from a box office standpoint, which I can only assume will be important to the distribution company for B25 given my point about there being fewer and fewer tentpoles out there these days (based on the evidence of the past few years). Villeneuve has yet to deliver a Nolan sized hit, although his films haven't performed poorly (apart from BR2049). Having said that, neither had Mendes or Forster prior to their kicks at the can. Just something I think will be looked at, that's all and especially if there are other director candidates out there we are not aware of. This is not a shot at the man, because I generally enjoy his films.
DV delivered... That's pretty universal at this point...
Something else failed (to me, the commercial expulsion is that the content is not very commercial); but no one looks at DV as delivering a $150 million turd; the opposite: DV delivered the goods (and more), but it failed at the BO for reasons X Y and Z...
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/new-on-amazon-prime-video-in-november-2017-james-b/1100-6454385/
I hope it's sooner than later. Either way we're towards the end of this year, production begins in about a year, so it's coming up.
Two to four months can really fly. I find it hard to believe we're already so close to Halloween. It's been 3 months since the release date was announced, yet it feels like only last week to me.
Is what they are doing now technically considered pre-production?
Where does that leave Bond??..
In terms of Bond in the market, yes I think the movie landscape is actually changing very fast, and I'm curious to see where B25 with Craig lands in that market.
I'm sensing a trend to switch back to lighter more adventure based fare. I could be wrong, but I think the deep introspective era may be coming to a conclusion
We're in a shift where mainstream theatrical releases will almost, exclusively be INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (graphic novels, novels, comics, sequels, re-makes, pre-quels (my Dog, Morgan Creek is re-branding, and then re-making their own content!!!! (http://deadline.com/2017/10/morgan-creek-rebrand-young-guns-ace-ventura-major-league-tv-film-reboots-1202195012/)); Oscar-bait pics, then--
Netflix wants to produce EIGHTY films this next year (Warner's made 20 last year as a measuring stick), and is swallowing up the "mid-budget" $50- 120 million dollar flick (if BR 2049 wasn't released this year, I would bet it'd be on Netflix, as a hit, a year or two from now);
We're not going back to yesterday, bondjames, but I think we're actually trudging forward into the great unknown... Including Bond and his place in the world... and that's something greater brains than mine will have to figure out (I've always said, after DC is done-- good luck with that)
However, over the decades I've seen that things move in cycles. We've had a period where there has been some deep introspective stuff in the cinemas, started by Nolan (he made it big, although the trend arguably began post 911). That's been underway for just over 10 years now and the Craig era has ridden that wave. Now we're seeing some cracks in the box office. Will it cause a reprioritization by Hollywood? I think this year has been a wake up call. They will take stock, see what worked and reposition. Like I said, I'm seeing a change to lighter fare (I could be wrong).
Tv is completely different. There is more of an opportunity to delve into deeper fare on tv, and I see that trend continuing.
Netflix is on a tear, it's true. They are reshaping the industry as are Amazon Prime. So will Apple when they get in. As you said, they're likely to lock the mid market and the tentpole franchise brands through traditional distributors will be the rest. Technology is having a massive impact too, including how the younger generation consume media.
Where will Bond be in 5 years? Re-imagined. With a new lead. It will do fine, as long as EON catch the trend again. As I've said before, they just need the right actor. He has to be versatile to accommodate the shifts in the market, in case tonal variations are required throughout his tenure. They will need a very creative director to reposition Bond in a durable fashion again. They will have to determine what they want to emphasize for the character, what they want to discard and move confidently forward. James Bond is durable. The risk to EON is that they try to redo what worked over the past decade. They shouldn't.
That said, looking at LALD for example, a new Bond, a new era, yet it had many similarities to DR NO 11 years prior: Jamaica, Bond's apartment, Felix, Quarrel, villain's own island, etc It feels completely different in tone to Connery's first film, and I can imagine the next actor's first outing will feel completely different to Daniel's.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/06/james-bond-distribution-rights-amazon-apple
EDIT: I was just watching an investment show where they were discussing box office. Apparently there is some thought in the industry to further shorten release windows due to the challenging conditions and get films into the home video or other markets more quickly. This could play into discussions as well (e.g. moving faster and more seamlessly to some sort of premium streaming service shortly after or even during the period that a film has been in the theatres).
I didn't realize before that Amazon has the exclusive rights (for 10 years from 2012) to publish Fleming's Bond books in North America. I learned it from the above article:
https://www.ft.com/content/0c3e5532-88e0-11e1-9b8d-00144feab49a
Problem is that Ryan Gosling (despite being a very decent actor) is not a box office draw either. I read the other day that his most successful film is Crazy Stupid Love, which is really a Steve Carell movie. So who should have been the face on the posters?
They obviously thought that with a string of recent successful high concept sci-fi films, this was the right moment for a sequel. The warning signs were always there though. Sequel so a commercial flop. Not even sure the original Blade Runner was critically well received either.
The though we could be in some 90 - 94 stalemate does kinda excite me in a way, since I don't think even the most diehard Craigites will be overjoyed with, once it's made. Right now, all four Craig films have a pretty solid fan base. I think a fifth one would end up like being something people TRY and find positives in. Like DAD, DAF and AVTAK. Not to mention that I still think the end of SP was pretty conclusive in terms of closing things out. I'm not invested in the Craig arc really, but I thought the idea of Craig finding another love from his time in the field kinda validated all the decisions he had made.
Regarding DV, I think he would be the perfect choice at the moment. It's a shame that BR flopped, but the guys stock is still pretty high and that might not be true in a few years. Also, I want them to use him now so that his name is ticked off the list once the reboot comes about. I only want Campbell and Nolan in consideration for that.
Ok, we all know you don't want to see a 5th Bond movie starring Craig happen, but I've got bad news for you, pal: it's extremely unlikely that things aren't moving smoothly behind the scenes right now. Bond 25 already has a production designer, for Christ's sake!
What. On. Earth. Are. You. Talking. About?? Right now it seems pretty unlikely that Bond 25 won't be significantly better than QOS and SP. I'm confident EON & Craig have learned from their mistakes and will do everything to make sure they will go out with a bang.
Bond 26, however with a different lead, maybe another story. Lets not forget, the biggest box office success stories of the year have generally been lighter toned adventure films such as Wonder Woman. And thank the stars for that imo.
I don't think I could stomach a sixth Bond film in a row with the same, introspective tone. What felt fresh as a daisy in CR now feels more stale than year old bread.
With this in mind B25 should, metaphorically, give us some idea of where things are to go after Craig hangs it up. The question then should be, how are they going to manage that transition? How do you smoothly transition from dreary and introspective to cheery and colourful? For me, I think gags are a good thing to avoid at this stage. They trialed that in SF and SP and it didn't really work. We still don't really have a 21st century humour yet in Bond, just (70's camp and 90's cheese repackaged) and that's going to take some working out. What if they just focused on making B25 SPECTACULAR and theatrical, without going outright comical. They could still have that kernel of a broken Bond, mourn Madders or something, but if we know the YOLT novel, we know there's some pretty oddball stuff going down in it. It does seem almost like a rulebook on how to transition the Craig Bond back to a more outrageous course.