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 would hope his "idea" is good, but I am completely skeptical after brother-gate. For all we know, Boyle's concept might be that Bond's parents never actually died in a climbing accident, and that Bond's biological father is actually Sheriff JW Pepper of the Louisiana State Police (with Joe Don Baker in talks to return to the series to tackle that iconic role).
Hold on to my beer, you've given me a great idea for a script!
I thought it was a funny thing to post. LOL
That is exactly what THR's speculation on the possible delay says
I've said this already, this isn't because of Boyle, even Baz said there's a deal between EON and Working Title to make this work for Boyle...
damn right. this delay hold up is clearly because of them. EON seem to have everything sorted on their end (script pending?), even managed to find a way to make Boyle doing the musical AND B25 work.
Agree. The annual tradition of watching certain Bond films during the summer, keeps my interest intact.
The future will become the past, and the time will come when there will be over a hundred official Bond movies.
LTK-GE, MGM. QoS-SF, MGM. SP-B25, MGM. B25 has been in development for several years. Perhaps when you look to the past you’ll also see it was here every issue we currently face was seeded. Harry’s bitterness is why we’re here.
But they would not have made B25 anyway. They were waiting for Craig's decision and they also wanted to spend some time on side uninteresting projects.
And MGM have half the rights of the Bond franchise, why? Saltzman didn't want to sell to Cubby.
As @antovolk has also, rightly, commented: EoN had ducks in a row to start shooting 25 with Boyle (making agreements with another film company so Boyle could shoot back-to-back and edit both films as well).
MGM is dragging their feet. Why? Who knows? Are they going to sell? Who knows? But they know they can get a distributor on board with a snap of the fingers. They know this, yet they still haven't bothered partnering with someone (wasn't it just a few months ago that they heard pitches from distributors? with Sony even re-creating the set of Dr No to impress?).
People may not like the new films, or Craig, or whatever, but when looking at delays? look at MGM to be the culprit (a company that would sink entirely if it wasn't for Bond... just look at their most recent out-put-- most of their productions are pathetic).
Just asking because I don't know. Did Broccoli offer more than United Artists paid?
That was reported by The New York Times on April 20, 2017, almost a year ago.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/20/business/media/james-bond-sony-mgm-eon-productions.html?mcubz=0&_r=0
At the current rate of production, the 100th film will be out around 2390.
I've already got my tickets reserved.
--2244 (assuming a three-year interval per film, assuming a 2019 release date for Bond 25).
--2319 (assuming a four-year interval per film, assuming a 2019 release date for Bond 25).
-- 2394 (assuming a five-year interval per film, assuming a 2019 release date for Bond 25).
@AlexanderWaverly ... Forgive me-- I'm missing your point. EoN is ready to shoot B25 and has made arrangements with another film company regarding the mutual director who will be shooting these film... It really does (as in most cases re: Bond delays), be an MGM agenda/stumble/dragging of feet.
My point was only to provide the specific date it was reported that five studios were seeking the Bond 25 distribution deal. Someone said wasn't it just a few months ago. I was just providing the specific date (and link) that it was longer than that. Nothing else intended.
I would agree MGM developments is *the main* reason for the current delay. However, I would say Eon and Craig have had a role, but not as big a role as MGM. Craig wanted a longer break. He got it. Eon/Barbara Broccoli wanted to do other things. It/she did them.
Oh, i fell you. And it's not like we have any other Bond-related media at the moment to keep us occupied and talking (well, besides some comics, but i haven't read them).
I've noticed people stopped talking about those rumors that were circulating a week ago.
P.S. Hello everybody, btw)
I cannot imagine that someone like Danny Boyle would be brought in at this late stage without at least preliminary discussions with a distributor about whether they are on board with this decision. After all, the distributor has to fund a large component of the production and will be promoting the film overseas. Consequently, if they are not onside with the scope and premise of the film, there will be no deal, or at the very least there will be a different structure to the financial arrangements of the deal. At the end of the day this is a business arrangement, and financial considerations and forecasts will dictate what sort of money is put up and what sort of margin is accepted.
Officially, what we know is that the script is either ready in first draft or very close to being ready. Then I would imagine there would be a review and some discussion around it. If there are fundamental disagreements about scope and approach, that could presumably result in a delay, independent of a possible sale of the studio to a 3rd party.
I have no problems with another year's delay in order for MGM to get its house in order and get on a more solid footing. That will only help to set the stage for a more rapid release schedule going forward for Bond #007, and that is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
We know there were at least preliminary discussions. The New York Times reported almost a year ago about the studios bidding on the distribution deal.
However, it's also clear the release date was announced (July 24, 2017) with no distributor in place. Maybe all concerned everything would fall into place. MGM and Annapurna announced their U.S. distribution joint venture on Oct. 31, 2017.
But I don't think we can assume everything is still almost in place. IF MGM really is trying to sell itself, all bets easily could be off. If the buyer had its own movie distribution operation, why mess around with what has gone on before?
Again I also agree with you. I vividly remember some suggesting then that a distribution deal had to have been in place for Craig to have made his announcement and for the release date to have been set. We now know that was not the case, and those who were more cautious about the state of affairs at that time appear to have been correct. It now seems that the release date was a proposed date to stake territory. If I'm not mistaken, they did something similar for SP as well, although that announcement was more detailed, with actor, director etc. To date we've only had the official MGM/EON announcement about P&W and release date together last July. Since then, we've learned that P&W may be out, and now the release date is also in question. No official distributor yet either.
Again I completely agree with you. If MGM is trying to sell then all bets are indeed off. I have no problems with that being the case, but again I am willing to bet that Boyle is a part of such conversations. It doesn't make sense to commission a Boyle/Hodge script if there is major uncertainty about a sale. I think many of us have suspected that a sale could occur, ever since we learned of the aborted one in 2016. So Boyle is a part of such conversations imho. The only impact will be a release date delay while such deal (if it happens) is consummated.
--they have an Academy Award winning director finalizing the script for a Bond film, with his writer executing the script, and; a proven Bond actor that is ready to go and has been successful over the past decade.
Everyone involved will know what a Bond film will make-- this is not a guessing a game: it's not Marvel; it's not Bourne; we will clear $750 million dollars WW.
Re-casting 007 brings the unknown... You will lose Boyle and his writer. You bring on an unproven new actor as Bond... All of a sudden, the for-sure numbers above (estimating a healthy profit average during the Craig years), and you can no longer guarantee any number for a new distributor.
That would be very bad business, IMHO.
Thank you. It seems the thread is in panic/apopletic mode over speculatory statements buried deep in a semi-related news story.
There is no confirmation from anyone yet that anything is being delayed, even though there might be some 'rumblings' and understandable fear.
Isn’t that really bad since spectre needed 650 to break even