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
Here we're talking about how much the actor who plays 007 is able to influence the production of those movies. Craig is a co-producer and he's even mentioned among the Broccoli in announcements regarding capital creative decisions for the franchise. Since Mendes4Lyfe mentioned Dalton and Brosnan being "fired", I was referring to those two actors. Simple.
I don't want to hurt anyone or criticize any Bond actor. If you really think Dalton and Brosnan had the same position and influence at EoN that has Craig at this moment, well okay then.
I never believed Hodge & Boyle (or anyone connected to the project) had an idea that was so amazing it had to be kept top secret.
Remember the press conference for SKYFALL, when Mendes blathered on and on about the incredible script, how it was so unique to the series? We ended up with a shoddily written third act that the writers (P&W) admitted they stole from a John Buchan novel.
Don't get me wrong, I really really like QoS and Forster did a good job out of all the problems that QoS had. But with QoS he already made his own unique "arty" James Bond movie. A sort of conceptual movie, faster than a bullet. I don't see what Forster could add at this point.
EoN needs fresh talent.
Granted, this could be a reason why he doesn't return. But keep in mind that he was asked back at a point when QOS had yet to undergo the reappraisal its had in recent years, and that he himself has said he is interested. Some things which might be in the way of that, I suppose, are studio/distributor concerns, bad timing, or just time passing and a desire to move on. Although historically Eon never seems to have had much of a problem going back to directors and asking them to return.
This is also true. Given that Craig seems to be understandably particular on the choice of director, and the fact that this is his last Bond film, I'd have thought he would rather have gone for a return to something/someone known/established (within the Bond world or just generally in film) than an up-and-comer. That really appears to have been the case at one point (Villenueve and Boyle). But maybe I've got it wrong, and he's not. Maybe it's a case of him now being willing to, given the circumstances. I'm open to it if he is.
There is a big difference between stolen and inspiring from. It's not stolen if they acknowledge it.
Yes and yes!
All I'm saying is three times the Bond series has had a gap four years or longer, and two of those times the lead role was recast. Craig is now 50, and depending on whether this project gets delayed, and for how long, it's possible he doesn't want to come back. If we have to accept that everything is going swimmingly as a possibility, then we should consider others as well.
I think that's a fair comment but I also agree with @matt_u that Craig is almost certainly going to stay on board for B25.
That's fine, I'm just saying it's a growing possibility. Until we get an official director announcement, and things visibly seem to be ramping up, I won't rule it out.
Thanks! Nothing to draw conclusions from still, then. Having other films being shot at the 007 stage at this point isn't strange at all.
B25 sets. Sorry for being vague.
Nothing much to take from this. For example, how many sets are taken down? Are they taken down for good or for just alterations depending on the script? Also, given two sources are telling different things, we don't know how much is true or not.
Why not? It would mean they know they will be using different sets.
It means they have given up on ideas they had previously commited to. In other words, they still aren't sure what the story is. Otherwise they would just adapt it to fit in the existing sets, like they have done previously.
I'm thinking highway.
1.) Well, he confirmed that he's in "discussions" with Eon. That sounds pretty definitive.
2.) In this podcast with Edith Bowman, he openly and happily talks about his next projects which is about a man pretending to be something he isn't in Trump's America. There is no mention of Bond. I assume the interview might have been recorded before the Bond rumours: https://l.instagram.com/?u=http://www.edithbowman.com/&e=ATPDyYyCgE_g4laYckYsRBwgmjPic3qQsrcaHqLISrxj1nbLf_InLiotDBTn3xs1L_ROyk2wldVM3Pqn
3.) In this more recent interview, his new project is suddenly much more secretive and something he can't talk about. He also mentions Bond and how he has been bitten by the bug of action films:
4.) He's a writer-director. Something Eon are actively seeking to tinker with the script.
I think Layton must have been in meetings all week and as @ColonelSun has suggested this must have been him closing the deal before confirmation next week.
The alternative is a little more depressing. We are closing in on a month on Tuesday since Boyle left Bond 25. I know Deadline said Eon have 60 days to fill the director's seat, but not only are they nearly halfway into that time, but there are so many other worrying indicators emerging (sets being taken down, Craig signing on to other projects, the old script being thrown out) that pretty much confirm it's delayed.
Either I'm deluding myself or Layton is the director.
Not too bothered with the Russian baddie/Mahori Henchman idea myself, but as you I choose to stay positive until it's impossible to be so. Any of the director names mentioned lately looks interesting enough to me – although different writers than Purvis/Wade could have been interesting. Oh, well.