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
Also BO estimates are in for GOTG Vol 2. BO.com's Long Range Forecast estimates $160 OW/$400 DOM!
Jeez. Those numbers are Huge! Speaking conservatively, this will make no less than $900 million WW when it's all said and done. A $Billion is easily reachable. Damn.
And now look. F&F have 3 (soon 4) huge B.O hits, Tom Cruise is making major action/adventure/sci fi films left and right, Neeson is churning out action flicks at a regular basis, Keanu Reeves is a major star again thanks to John Wick, people like Lee Byung Hun, Iko Uwais and Donnie Yen are now world-wide superstar, older stars like Gibson, Denzel, Stallone and Arnie are having late career resurgence, Dwayne Johnson has 20+ big budget films he's planning on doing, we have multiple films for Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers, we have a film with both Batman and Superman, and soon more sequels for Dr Strange, Black Panther, Ant- Man, Deadpool, even more Spiderman films, X Men films, solo Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, Justice League, and who the hell knows.
I know, right?
The landscape has changed dramatically over the last 10 years and to add to what you said, studios are now copying Marvel in trying to create cinematic universes and with the monumental success of Deadpool, studios are now taking more risks with their properties in making R-rated blockbusters. There's huge sums of money to be made. It's a crazy time for moviegoers for sure. All this makes the Bond situation all the more frustrating. Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't a blip on any sort of radar 5 years ago and later this year, it could end up being close to a $2 Billion franchise. It's crazy.
It actually annoys me that we get news of a sequel to a film that hasn't even come out yet all the time these days. I'm sure GotG2 will do well enough to warrant a sequel, but the presumption of the idea is just a bit showy and short-sighted.
I miss the days where a film came out and did well, then deserved a sequel that people could get excited about. I also miss the days where the details of the sequel were released until far after the original came out, so that we didn't see the story of the next one coming a mile away.
I think that's what EoN are doing to be honest.
Let's not get delusional.
What's delusiomal is EoN being stuck with a mediocre mindset and hiring the same writers who've done nothing but get a bad rap from the fanbase, justifiably so and who's work is constantly being doctored due to their limitations. I feel let down by EoN these past couple of Bond entries and the only bit of real news surrounding Bond 25 is hiring Purvis and Wade again for script duties instead of EoN doing the research and ponying up for a better team of writers that can offer us something different; and doesnt involve a close to home personal vendetta; which we've been getting for each entry for more than 20 years. Actions speak louder than words and it's clear Purvis and Wade returning speaks volumes. That's definitely EoN counting on people's bad taste to stay the same imo.
EON are always consistent with writers, that's why Maibaum wrote the films until the day he died for Christ's sake, even through the slump in quality of the films (or at least a lower audience reaction).
Clearly EON have a lot invested in P&W, and trust them. They adapted CR beautifully, and if the word of insiders is anything to go by (or the leaked e-mails) they saved the day on SP too by cleaning up what Logan left the team to deal with. It's unclear how heavily they worked on QoS on account of the blurry strike, but it amounts to one of my favorite scripts of the modern films if they had so much as a hand in it.
They're not perfect, but no Bond writer is. If P&W are working on the next film, which I won't believe until it's announced from EON, then they clearly want to look into their ideas and see what they can make of them. In the past P&W have been saddled by bad creative partners that forced them into writing utterly stupid shite (DAD being a pure example of it) and then they are the ones that get all the blame even though the ideas weren't theirs.
People have to understand that writers are at the mercy of other creative superiors a lot of the time, and while they can include a lot of original ideas in scripts, sometimes the writers aren't actually the person who should be blamed for a fuss you have at the end of the day.
I am much happier with the P&W of the Craig era than that of the Brosnan era because it's clear that they've been able to do more of what they'd like to see, or at least work on scripts that aren't as "loopy" or over the top. They've grown a hell of a lot in that time, especially when it comes to drama, adaptation and character arcs.
Purvis and Wade, however are not Maibaum and they have never ever impressed me with any of their Bond work and I don't credit them for CR at all; but then again they are who they are and I recognise the limitations of their "talent" so it's not really so much as them I have an issue with because I'll never begrudge anyone trying to make an honest living. Everyone has to eat. However, this goes back to my issue with EoN, the folks in charge. They don't need to make the writing process as complicated as they've made it since Purvis and Wade joined. The "clean up" of the SP script at the 11th hour still ended up being terrible anyway. Sure, what Logan turned in was apparently worse but a polished turd does not a diamond make. EoN fucked up with their responsibilities as producers who should have been closely overseeing the progress of the script at regular stages; as good film producers are known to do. EoN's dereliction of duty was very real.
To keep this somewhat on topic because we've clearly strayed; but irrespective of what one thinks of the MCU and especially with Perlmutter out of the picture, Feige would never make such a colossal error in judgement as a producer and he's overseeing multiple franchises in a cinematic universe. EoN have one job to do and it's proving somewhat difficult for them at the fundamental stage of film making. Furthermore, they have the money and the clout to attract the best writers in the business and according to capitalism 101, you get what you pay for and what we're getting is the same old dog with the same uninspired, tired tricks. Like I said in a previous post in another thread, Bond 25 will be the ultimate litmus test for me. I may be alone with my views here and that's fine; time will tell how right or proven wrong I am. I sincerely hope it's the latter.
Purvis and Wade have only failed, in my opinion, on one film, and that's DAD. Clearly, they deserve at least some credit.
EON are also just one small production company in the grand scheme of things, whereas Marvel has all of Disney behind them, the most monopolistic company in our current times, and maybe ever. What EON has in comparison to Marvel and Disney, however, is loyalty. They welcome back creators who've helped them in the past, keep the films in the family, don't murder their stars with heavy contracts and actually pay people what they're worth. Marvel and Disney on the other hand have a nasty history of low-balling every actor outside of Downey, strangle them in contracts and switch from talent to talent every film probably going on who is cheapest to pay.
In short, EON represent the good of the industry, and Marvel and Disney the bad. Thankfully I can still enjoy the Marvel films, even though I know of the slimy things that happened to make the movies.
Cant say I agree. In fact I think its easier to do Bond. With these superheroes they havevtheir own individual franchises with theur own stories to tell and to then be either blatantly or loosely connected to a bigger narrative. The reason why Marvel have made it work forvthe most part is because they had/have a plan and stuck to it instead of taking an adhoc approach in how they execute things, which only leads to things feeling disjointed, which for me encapsulates the Craig era.
The villain of the times thing is silly to me. A good antagonist is exactly that; a good antagonist. It comes down to being well written and overall execution. A villain can be anyone with a decent plan that can offer a credible threat. Lets not pretend the Bond villains of late are anything to screamnhome about and lets not even fetvstarted on the henchmen. I've found the last 3 villains of MI better than what we've got in the last 3 Bond films, heck, Piercec and Zemo in Cap 2 and 3 respectively did more for me than Greene, Silva and Brofeld. The "big bad" we got in SP was a joke and did nothing but disappoint. Marvel handled Hydra so much better than what EoN did with spectre. So much could have been done with the character and organization and things were looking good but it all went wrong by the time we got to Morocco.
Marvel's villains haven't been the greatest and it hasn't gone unoticed. On the contrary. It's one of the biggest complaints about the MCU and even Feige himself has acknowledged this and is course correcting this problem going forward. However, they largely get everything else right, particularly with their protagonists and they take more creative risks in trying to keep a family-like dynamic in making these films while concurrently understanding this is a money making business.
EON are also just one small production company in the grand scheme of things, whereas Marvel has all of Disney behind them, the most monopolistic company in our current times, and maybe ever.[/quote]
Which is a relatively new development. Marvel Studios are only 10 years old and were already making waves and changing the landscape of Hollywood blockbusters before Disney got involved, proving to be financially viable and profitable enough for Disney to buy up in the first place. Even now, here on these boards there are numerous posters that have expressed their like for Disney to distribute Bond.
The Marvel contracts are nowhere near as bad as your making out. Hugo Weaving was contractually obligated for a multipicture deal to appear as the red skull and after Cap 1 expressed his desire not to return and that he's not being forced to. A similar situation happened with Natalie Portman. However, Weaving has since changed his tune and understandably wants back in. As for EoN paying people what they're worth, tell that to Sean Connery. Heck, EoN wanted Chiwitel Ejiofor and decided to compromise quality by going cheap in getting that Irish guy to platform Dengby. Like I said earlier, you get what you paid for. In any case, regardless of paying people or keeping it in the family, I just don't see the overall joyous passion or enthusiasm from the talent going into these last couple of movies and all Craig mainly does during the press junkers is mostly come off as dour and complains about being exhausted etc, which is a far cry different from many of the Marvel actors who physically have to do more. The likes of Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth who have to get their bodies looking super and doing all these wire and stunt work is intense stuff especially with the proximity of when the films come out but everyone over at EoN are tired and take 3 to 4 year breaks.
That's a gross exaggeration.
EoN represent the good? Mate, let's not forget the shady stunts EoN have pulled over the years. That documentary that came out where execs from United Artists were calling out Cubby and Saltzman for their selfish and greedy antics didn't just stop there. There's also the ridiculous contract they tried to impose on Lazenby and that's just the tip of the iceberg. There's a reason why EoN are for the large part, more than any other production company/movie studio release very little information and material out of their mountainous archives. EoN aren't even close to being the bastion of puritanical ethics that you're painting them as. They're just like every other production company/film studio for the most part.
When it comes to villains, I don't think Marvel have anything that outwardly beats Bond, even recently. Loki is vastly overrated, Zemo is a non-entity, even Winter Soldier didn't make ripples in that way. Granted, it's hard to write villains, but at best Marvel can only hope to tie Bond at this point, if their best has already come and gone. It's also not fair to judge SPECTRE at this point, as it only featured a bit in SP. You wouldn't judge the entire organization after two scenes of Blofeld in FRWL. That being said, most of my favorite SPECTRE moments are in the newest film.
You keep mentioning the unmentionables of EON's past, when I was quite clearly talking about Michael and Barbara's involvement and not what Cubby and Harry did decades upon decades ago. Clearly it's not relevant to a discussion about modern filmmaking.
The Marvel pay and contract issues aren't that exaggerated. It's well known that during The Avengers all the main actors were being thrown pennies for their contributions, and if not for Downey basically throwing them an ultimatum, things could've ended a lot differently.
As for the villains aspect we'll just have to agree to disagree. I found spectre as an organisation underwhelming and the hype of the threat as presented in SP never lived up to its potential. Cap 2 for me did a much better job in presenting just how nefarious and sinister Hydra were by comparison and the bulk of that was done in one movie.
However, you're right about Marvel and their past pay structures but they were doing no different than what other production companies and film studios do and have done.
Ultimately, Marvel is the biggest franchise player in town, attracting top, existing, new and undiscovered talent; turning each and everyone of their properties into critical and financial hits. Business 101: proper planning prevents poor performance. EoN knows this better than most and as of late seldom apply it. One doesn't have to like Marvel or comic book movies but I for one respect and appreciate Marvel's hustle.
In any case I want Bond back on top sooner rather than later. I want him to be part of the conversation instead of the tired narrative of who the next Bond will be that tends to dominate the subject of the character whenever Bond is talked about.
We can say they planned things to death for their franchise, but I think you'll find that isn't as true as you'd think. Of course they probably had ideas of what they wanted to do a few years in advance, but at times films were thought up on the fly, including the mega-hyped Civil War which was never the original plan and not even a thought in their minds until much much later. Planning is fine, but you also have to be able to change those plans and adapt when competition enters or an idea fails to prove worthy due to casting concerns, budget, etc.
As for Bond "being a part of the conversation," I think he's fine. In our world people aren't likely to conversate much anyway, and when they do it's trivial nonsense, so there's nothing lost. The last two Bond films alone have given us a billion plus and near billion dollar follow-up, so I don't think the character is in danger of dying quite so randomly. Any mention of Bond is click-bait, and that's exactly why we hear so much concerning the next film before the current film even comes out. It's big news, all the time, and the franchise is one of the last vestiges of event cinema where the films are culturally important and worth celebrating each year they come out.
Like few other Bond films SF and SP celebrated Bond as a British hero with heavy mythology through the use of English motifs and themes, and clearly people responded to that. With his characterization as a gallant knight in a suit, there's much mileage to get out of a traditional man in a divisive and strange modern world. People can be very dramatic, predicting the death of Bond as we know it, but if he survived the 70s and 80s drought, legal hoops, hiatuses and mega casting changes, he'll be fine. He hasn't lasted for over half a century going on just luck.
Let's also not act like EON planned every film like Marvel has done, even back in the day. The movie that was next was always changing, and plenty of scripts could be floating around at once for multiple films, like Maibaum working on drafting OHMSS years before it was ever even agreed on as a fundable film. It's also harder to plan ahead and adapt scripts when you don't have Fleming to work from like they did for so long. In the 60s it was easy to write up ideas for a DN, GF or TB script, etc., because the source text was already there for you to pick from. Making something from scratch with noting to base it on, however, is exponentially more difficult. And then things get thrown at you during or before production like a writer's strike, studio issue or major leak and a wrench is further put into your plans as your vision is forced to change.
Barbara and Michael have had to deal with a lot out of their control in the past decade alone, and I mean a lot of things. Every film of the Craig era was saddled with a major issue before the production or even during it that challenged the patience and creativity of everyone involved, impacting, slowing or even halting progress on their movie, yet they pushed through each and every time. It's why they deserve my respect, and I don't try to judge them for every little thing knowing how hard their jobs can be.
I agree but the point I've made on numerous occasions is that it's never really been their standard as such. That shady and scheming side of things came from one person and that was Ike Perlmutter. It was Ike that was penny-pinching and screwing everyone over, he didn't want female villains and vetoed Rebecca Hall in Iron Man 3, his rather racist comments about recasting the Jim Rhodes (War Machine) character and if it were up to him not only would my avatar never exist but there wouldn't be a black panther film/franchise. Marvel aren't to blame for the select one or few and it's because of Perlmutter, Feige was constantly at war with him from day one and fortunately Feige prevailed and had him ousted. Again, this is why I champion Feige so much and have immense respect for him as a producer. He was able to make the most of dicey situations with hands tied and still knock out result upon result whole also striving for the dairy and honest things to be done for both the talent and the company.
This is from Cate Blanchette's recent interview with Yahoo:
“When I was starting to think about how she might look, I went back to the fanbase,” said Blanchett, who recently spoke to Yahoo. “All these girls were doing Hela makeup looks on YouTube. I thought about what their takes on her were. I spoke to Marvel about what she would look like when she would be unmasked, so she wasn’t a faceless, generic baddie. They were very open to everything.”
“I didn’t realize until I got on the set that this is the first Marvel film incarnation of a female villain. What decade are we in? It was shocking to me. The character they created is ballsy and front-footed.”
Before the production team moved to South Korea, some reporters/journalists visited the Atlanta set of the black panther movie and they're saying that without giving anything away, on a scale of 1 to 10 of awesomeness the movie is a 12 and it's going to rock and blow people's minds.
This wouldn't be possible if Perlmutter were still in charge. He was a very big problem and although it was a lengthy process he's been thankfully removed.
I've never said or suggested that Marvel's planning is/was THAT stringent. In fact I agree with you and have often commended Marvel's flexibility in being able to make changes and adjustments without negatively impacting or creating disastrous results for themselves. Spider-Man joining the MCU, being part of CW and his two solo films, as well as the inhumans no longer being an exclusuve cinematic franchise being examples. Still, this and what you were saying only reinforces what I said about proper planning. Planning isn't just about dealing with an immediate situation but being ready for potential variables.
I agree but the way I feel is all the hype, effort and excitement goes into the circus spectacle of the press announcements/photo calls for these movies that are mega-hyped and then when the film comes out I'm left feeling disappointed. I've said it time and time again, the Bond name alone and the institutional history isn't enough for me; I need the films to be great again. I haven't felt wholly satisfied with a Bond film since CR and like you said, these films should be celebrated as and when they come out but I can't jump for joy just because we're getting a movie; I need the movie to actually deliver, especially given EoN's experience and the length of time between films. If we have 4 and 3 year gaps, I expect better than what we got for SF and SP.
That yhey did. Some responded positively, others negatively; especially with SP.
I agree but like I've been saying, this isn't the 60s, 70s or 80s, hell this isn't even the early 2000s. Bond back then was a dominating key market player in a very different climate and landscape. In the last 3 weeks alone we've had 3 major blockbuster releases that have come out every week and it's only March. You talked about being able to adapt and that's exactly what EoN have to do going forward. Competition is stifling, more than 90% of theatrical releases are blockbusters being released in close proximity to each other, both tentative and confirmed release dates for tentpole films are released ridiculously early and access to varied content via cinema, streaming, TV offer different things to different people. The domestic BO for SP saw a 34% drop from SF's domestic number and didn't go all that well critically Stateside. There are many variables today and even more tomorrow that Bond didn't really have to face before and that EoN need to think about but again, I agree that Bond is far from dead but I don't want him coasting either.
Plan ahead for what? Bond films before the Craig era were stand alone films that didn't need nor require ardent interconnective narratives. The only thing EON needed to concern themselves with was the film they were working on at the time. We got FRWL when we did simply because it was a favourite of JFK's and EoN were like "Super! That's the film we'll make next then".
As for scripting and not having Fleming, there's plenty of unused Fleming work to mine, it's easy to readapt and take influence from the essence of his writings and/or EoN could hire better script writers who can write a good thriller and then infuse it with Fleming touches. I don't understand the difficulty here. Both Babs and Mike grew up in this business and in the world of Fleming, surely they have the capacity to not act so stumped when tasked with such an undertaking. For goodness sake, Wilson wrote scripts for these movies; at the very least he could/should share and better explore ideas; seeing as he's a producer and all. Feige is a 70s baby and never written a comic book in his life but he's read and understands the material, knows what works and identifies and extracts the essences of what makes the material appealing and then seeks out those who understand and can capitalise the spirit of what makes these properties entertaining and thus we get critical and commercial hits. Relying mainly on legacy and history isn't enough and in some cases isn't even an option. It's about telling stories that are entertaining and make embracing the genre worthwhile. Feige gets this and it's not difficult for any producer worth their salt to understand this either.
Studio issues like the MgM restructuring and the current distribution matter are extenuating circumstances. However, had Saltzman not been a mega dick EoN wouldn't be in this problem. Still, it's not EoN's fault and they can't be blamed for what is obviously out of their control.
However, what was within their control was the writer's strike. They could and should have waited but they didn't because they were drunk with CR's success and were too impetuous to put out another movie; and decided to risk putting out a clearly flawed product instead of wisely pushing tge release date back and waiting to get things right once the strike was over. They could have done this but they decided not to.
As for leaks, that's obviously disappointing but it registers to me EoN were more upset about the exposing of how bad their creative process was and the abundance of incompetence and dereliction of duty that was going on. Logan being left for too long before turning in his crappy script, Mendes wanting to drop out because of it...it was an embarassing mess. It had less to do with keeping script secrets.
Tarantino's hateful 8 script was leaked and he was only pissed because he was 99% happy with the scrip instead of an even 100% and because of that threatened to not make the film but he changed his mind, made the film and it was a critical and financial success.
I agree their jobs can be difficult but as mentioned I'd never blame them for things that are out of their control but tge things that are within their control and that they do a negligent job of as producers, they'll get called out for it. They're not Nicky nobody producers who've acquired the Bond rights from a production/studio take over. Babs and Mike have Bond in their blood and now is the time for them to take a serious look envisioning what happens next.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/03/17/smallvilles-michael-rosenbaum-has-a-role-in-guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2
They will be playing related characters that are important to the Marvel Universe in the soon-to-be-released Guardians sequel. I believe the second name there had been rumored in the past (now confirmed), and the first couldn't make me happier. I think I'm more excited to see him in Guardians than anyone else (possible exception of Kurt Russell as Pratt's dad).
#BlackPantherSoLit
My most anticipated film EVER. I'm so freakin' pumped.