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
That’s disgusting. Never really took the time to look at it that way. 2 whole years. You’re right, next to nothing! EoN must realllllly care about their fans...
I am calling it now boys,
Announcement on filming date and director late summer. Title announcement and cast in December.
Filming starts in December.
They shoot for what six to eight months? Movie out in November?
Seems reasonable. The franchise is very last minute honestly. This isn’t like Batman/DCEU/Marvel where we get concept art at comic con. LOL.
But hopefully the four year gap we're currently in the midst of is not only being used to work on B25 but also B26, whomever is responsible for it. The current four year wait would be made much easier with the assurance that the era-changeover for B26 will be less the tear it down/build it back up retooling of GE/CR and more seamless in the vein of LALD or TLD. So far each time the actor has had a vague sense that the film would be their final, the transition has been smooth and efficient. Fingers crossed.
----
Thought of something: DAF/LALD might prove to be an interesting comparison point for B25/B26.
Going into both DAF/B25 the production team faced/faces (a) an older, accepted actor in the lead role going into the film with the understanding it'll be his last and (b) the uncertain choice of which direction to take the film's plot in, owing to the continuity-heavy story of the previous film.
Cubby and Harry elected to mostly ignore the previous film and get on with it. They completely changed up the tone, then changed it again for the next actor's debut. In response to Connery's leaving, they hired a long-touted, capable, and recognizable leading man to take his place, and got his first two films out in quick fashion.
Plenty of us now express dissatisfaction of not being given a proper sequel to OHMSS, but the fact remains that the franchise (almost amazingly) survived Connery. Who knows how things might have turned out if Harry and Cubby had made different choices. They had some understanding of how to keep the franchise going. It'll be interesting to see how history compares. Theirs isn't a bad plan to keep in mind.
This mentality is possibley why Newman’s score is shite, why the editing in Qos isn’t perfection and why they can never ever do reshoots.
Also, if EON really are thinking of selling or handing off the franchise and taking a backseat, would the perfect time to do that be after SF. Think about it, the 4th Bond actor took over for the 25th anniversary, and the 6th and final EON actor would leave with the 50th anniversary. And they would call it quits when the franchise was on an all time high critically and commercially. Why they decided to carry on, only to sell two films later (again, if hearsay is to be believed) is quite baffling to me.
Regardless, if Nolan did get the chance to reboot, I believe he would throw everything he had into it. His love for the films is undeniable.
They have been making another film since SP.
But then I think this train of thought comes from reading the fan commentary on here, which is 95% conjecture.
We all know the reasons why SF was delayed, but they got their ducks in a row and produced what was inarguably a huge critical and financial success. It may be easy to forget for some detractors, I myself had certain issues with it, but never did I see it as anything other than a hugely impressive effort by EON. Bond was huge again.
If anything it completely overperformed, in a way no Bond film has to come close to in the modern era. It’s understandable they wanted to capitalise on that and equally understandable that they felt Mendes held the key.
Turns out lightning doesn’t strike twice and again, despite me actually thinking SP is a perfectly fine film, there was some debatable decision making and I’m sure they’ll have thought long and hard about what went wrong during the process.
There’s no doubt in my mind that is why we’re seeing another prolonged period of development before B25, while they try to nail exactly where they are going. There’s no obvious route and in their two previous attempts to produce ‘sequels’, they’ve turned out to be critical failures, relative to their predecessors.
For my money Barbara will be only too aware that most tenures end on a damp squib (critically at least), likewise she’ll be aware of the reception afforded SP. She’ll want to address that issue by delivering a satisfying finale to Craig’s tenure.
Whether people think the processes that are in place are flawed is up to them, but I can see why things have worked out the way they have. Had there been no issues regard MGM’s debt pre-SF we would’ve had B23 served up earlier than expected and things might have taken a more consistent path with moderate success and more films.
As it turns out, the delay followed by the unmitigated success of SF continues to dictate the path we are on. It’s hard to simply go back to making a ‘standard’ Bond flick in those circumstances, which I know is why some fans want a change, but it’s EON’s decision to stick with Craig and they have the ability to pull it off. I don’t for a minute believe they’re stumbling through. They aren’t obliged to produce a Bond film, they do it because they want to (and I’m convinced this idea of selling up is wide of the mark).
All I’m saying is, fans need to have some faith. I don’t see the logic in turning up to the MI6 altar everyday praying for delays, or for Craig to put so much weight on he gets fired. It’s become quite tiresome and slightly pathetic. If this series has been as ‘off the rails’ as some suggest it has for the last decade, why are you spending your days on here? I’m being rhetorical of course, I’m fully aware those who bleat the loudest will be the first to slam the next casting decision, the next title and so on... just hoping that those with a more rational mindset can see that a Craig fronted B25 can still work.
I,personally think the Boyle/Hodge scenario could be the genuine one,writing a script to compare to P&W's finished one.
Which means we are still on course for an Oct/Nov 2019 release with Craig.
thunderous applause? Where exactly outside the Colbert show? They didn't even report on it on CNN nor any German Network ( very contrary to the wrist slashing comment, I might add)
That was before we saw how he looked at the BAFTA's. I can't see many applauding now, as Craig has not aged anywhere near as gracefully as Moore or Brosnan at the same age. (or Dalton for that matter.)
THR: I know you don’t want to do a James Bond film -- too big a budget, etc -- but if you could do one your way, on a small budget, full creative freedom, what would a Danny Boyle-made James Bond film look like?
Boyle: I’ve already done one. You've seen it. Stellar cast as well. But I’m not really the guy for those movies. What we do, right, is we use genre -- you take a genre, like this has got a few genres running in it, you use a genre to try and get you in the mainstream. It’s a vehicle to boost you into the mainstream. And then you f--- with the genre. You twist it and change it and move it around. You can’t do it on those big movies. You genuflect in front of them. Too much money, too expectation. It’s the faith of the fans, it’s all that. You’ve got to be very careful. It’s very tempting of course -- I love the movies, I love the books, but I’m not the right guy for those.
They have been making another film since SP.
What I said. There was a BBC Culture Show with him in 2013 where he said similar things.
My Good Friend, we know more as fans than the Daily Mail and Express who run these Bond stories to get their partner betting companies money with an influx of bets.
Good grief, that’s what you took away from this, really? The point is he will be ready and his announcement was greeted by most fans with enthusiasm.
Anyone who has worked in multiple companies knows that there are some operations (and some leaders) who are very good with process. These entities are structured for consistent success. There are others which are anything but. The best ones are able to maintain a certain level of control while also allowing artistic creativity & innovation to shine through. They tend to deliver decent products consistently. In such operations, a mega hit is not 'luck', but rather the product of that process. It's really a fine balance.
I'm optimistic about this Boyle news and look forward to an update by May.
I do agree with him that there wasn't any thunderous applause (except on the Colbert set - I've been on those shows and they actually tell you when to clap). The next day I saw miscommunication (with some papers and websites reporting that he was unsure and others reporting that he was in, depending on when they went to press). Two days later it was all but forgotten. Some members over here may have been jumping up and down with glee for days, but the general public just moved on.
As I said, it's primary purpose was to kill 'wrist slash' dead in articles referencing Bond (it had been quoted in nearly every article for two full years). It worked, until his unusual BAFTA appearance rekindled the comments in articles. Then we coincidentally had the Boyle news break and fortunately it has taken attention away until he goes into hiding and gets whatever problems he may have sorted out.
In short, anyone who doesn't praise and applaud is on a general negativity rant.
Agreed.