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
Barbara was a child in 1962.
And Harry Saltzman and Cubby Broccoli were not brothers.
Are you that obtuse?
It's a fact.
If you want us to have blind faith, let's tell the truth.
Do you take everything literally?
EoN is as close to a mom n pop shop as you can get in Hollywood -- is that better, Deke? Does that meet with your approval?
And who said anything about blind faith? You must have issues with not only lacking in nuance, but you put words in people's mouths.
Childish at best.
Try harder....
Look, people have different opinions, Eon didn't invent Bond and God knows this isn't the same Eon. This is not Royalty, they are not untouchables.
What are you going on about?
I didn’t say they were royalty.
I didn’t call them untouchables.
I never said they invented Bond.
What are you going on about?
Give your head a shake.
Tell me, what are you trying to tell us?
@DEKE_RIVERS — did you read my original post?
You’re putting words in my mouth.
You want me to tell you what I’m “trying” to tell “us”?
Read the post again. Okay? It’s pretty clear what I’m saying.
Read the post again, and if you should have any more questions, stop clogging up this thread with your trolls, and PM me, okay?
But I think most really saw what my post was about. Sorry you’re having trouble deciphering which doesn’t need to be deciphered…
I have to admit that when reading your comment,
I had a similar reaction as @peter. Why that comment? It adds nothing to what he was saying. The man types out a nuanced post with solid arguments and then you barge in with two extremely short sentences that should somehow, sleight of hand, disprove his entire line of reasoning... which they don’t, since you merely picked up one small detail of his post and thought it clever to point out that "family" is not to be taken literally. At the very least, communicate your full thoughts rather than two simple facts we are all familiar with. As a result, @peter had to all but nose-pick your ideas out of you over the span of several posts. This is what we have been telling you since day 1: your style borders on spam. Directly or indirectly, you just clog up this forum's arteries with your short posts that don't say anything at all, or require us to labor through an exhausting question-and-answer game to suss out their meaning. Our patience is wearing thin, mate.
Because we use the word "family" to discredit different opinions. You know, "nobody can do it better".
They’re not royalty, but simply a very successful company - at the very least financially - who have shaped a major British film property. Doesn’t mean you can’t criticise the films themselves (although that’s very much subjective).
Disney is a successful company but Bob Iger didn't make Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
Yes in many ways I tend to think that the credit on the titles should really be 'Roger Brosnerry as Ian Fleming, Cubby Broccoli & Harry Saltzman's James Bond 007' because they are as responsible for creating the concept of James Bond at this point as Fleming, especially where he sits in the wider culture. They reshaped the character and developed it, and more people have been exposed to and know their version than they do Fleming's. That's why I think it was rather nice that NTTD was named after a Cubby film rather than a Fleming title- it respects that influence. Obviously everything's based in Fleming's work, but if you take Broccoli & Saltzman away you're left with a very different character.
The thing that always makes me laugh is, no matter how successful and valuable James Bond is, the Fleming family bank, now asset managing company, is worth way, way, way more- to the tune of many billions. Ian did, basically, make the wrong decision all those years ago not to go into it! :D
The level of immense wealth surrounding everyone involved in Bond, even before he was created, is kind of unimaginable. So no matter what anybody says here about them in a nasty way, they're doing okay :D
Snow White hasn’t gone through several different versions over the decades from that same company, being updated for the times by members of the same family/company who’ve worked on these films for decades.
Different examples mate. I’m curious though, what are you actually trying to say? That you don’t think EON are beyond criticism (which is obvious) or that you don’t think they should be making the Bond films? (Which is at least an interesting thing to say, whether people agree or not).
EON are not beyond criticism and this EON are not the same old EON. Dr NO was made by completely different people!
EON could be sold and there would still be Bond movies.
But I never used the word “family” to discredit anyone, @DEKE_RIVERS !! I literally used it to say, in comparison to the huge studio system, EoN is as close to a mom n pop shop as one can get in the film industry. Why are you twisting my words? It’s very apparent what I meant.
And as far as Bond goes, to date, no one does do it better. And after sixty plus years that’s an incredible feat. If you don’t want to believe this, that’s fine. But there’s no doubt in a world where we’ve seen film series come and go, Bond is not only still standing, he’s the pinnacle of how an IP should be handled.
I’d ask you to read posts three times before responding, just to make sure you understand what the poster is saying.
When has anyone said EoN is beyond criticism? @DEKE_RIVERS , you’re either making things up, or you’re reading things no one has said, I’m sorry.
And Cubby made this a family affair. There’s no disputing that. Companies evolve but they evolved from the seeds that were planted all the way back in the first days before DN.
Yeah, that’s what I’m saying, they’re not beyond criticism.
And yes, DN was made by different people (although I think you’re underestimating just how long Cubby/members of his family worked on these films, and how important the work of Barry, Young, Adams, and a range others on that film was to the series/how it was adapted afterwards). Anyway, I wouldn’t hold DN up as the perfect Bond film by any means. Even the Connery films straight after that tinkered around with the character/way these films were made, and it’s a process that’s still going on under EON to this day.
Ok, so who could they sell it to then? Who do you think specifically would do a better job or understand Bond enough to keep this series alive as EON have done? You’re so close to saying something interesting.
That can happen, that's all.
As Peter said companies evolve.
Yeah, but a big part of that is who would it be sold to, and would the individuals in that company be able to creatively carry on the franchise? There’s even more questions - could this ever happen in the short term with the way EON is currently being run (that’s to say by members of the same family)? Would it morph into something completely different to what we know as James Bond, and to what degree is this the case currently?
Just saying EON can be sold is a bit boring. There’s more to it than that.
Eon at least always go back to Fleming. I'm not a huge Fleming fan, I've only read Moonraker and it isn't my favourite book or anything, but at least when you take Fleming's Bond as the core you have some sort of consistency. I don't like all the creative decisions Eon have made in recent years, but at least I feel they feel they have a responsibility to the character and a respect for his past. I'm not sure I can think of anyone else who would have the same level of commitment to the character. In someone (or should I say something?) else's hands there is a danger it would just become a brand to be exploited and then discarded.
Who Knows? Can Gregg Wilson handle the franchise alone?
I do think the decision to keep the characters introduced in Spectre going in NTTD rather than forgetting that film existed might have been influenced by seeing how Disney tried to compromise between fans of TFA and TLJ, giving us a final film that tries make everyone happy and ends up a mess. It probably was better picking a direction and sticking with it.
I do appreciate what The Last Jedi was trying to do. The idea of Luke losing his way and having to find it again is compelling (again, I’m really not a Star Wars fan, and I know people who are who dislike this idea for some reason, but I think the concept is great and very in character). It’s not done amazingly well but it feels interesting. I even like the idea of Rey not initially being a Skywalker/essentially someone ‘unimportant’ who has learnt to use the force. It’s what should be a great twist - someone who isn’t ’the chosen one’ believing they are, but still accomplishing something heroic (reminds me of Blade Runner 2049).
Regardless though, I think that trilogy is a failure in the creative side of producing, which shows just how competent the Bond team is by comparison. The main villain is seemingly killed off by the second film necessitating Palpatine be brought back (again, on my only viewing it was a weird experience in terms of how ham fisted it was) and ideas/even characters introduced in the first two films are dropped or undone in the last one. I appreciate stories unfold organically to a degree, but it felt as if the last film was fighting the other two in order to ‘fix’ things rather than try to adapt these ideas in a creative way. NTTD by comparison feels more organic to the story of Craig’s Bond while being its own film.
I suppose like BB and MGW that’s what he’s being ‘trained’ to do. Is he going to be the only family member at the helm though? Genuinely don’t know.
Bond is so iconic and lucrative that you could see them all ending up in the business, maybe.
But it's clear that they're training Gregg, and I believe the plan is for Gregg to work with BB when the day comes that MGW hangs em up.
Like any good entrepreneurs, theyve looked ahead and they've been preparing to keep the family business running...