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
Genuine question: you mean from a quality standpoint, right? Because box office wise Endgame was a massive success.
Yeah, I just hope they don't....or maybe they have started eyeing the next guy to play Bond to meet up with the 60th anniversary....coz I don't think Eon would want to miss the 60th anniversary. And coupled with the uncertainty before Craig finally returned as Bond....is something Eon might not want to do again. Maybe the Rumours of PWB being told to pen Bond 26, is for the New Bond Actor and to meet up with the 60th anniversary.
Yes that’s fair enough.
Source?
The EW article.
+1
An expanded universe is the first right step on the "how to kill your golden egg goose" instruction compendium. Spinoffs, streaming series, and fan fiction being subsections of said chapter.Thankfully, it seems EON have their hearts and minds in the right place. Let's hope Gregg Wilson is an apple fallen not far from that (family) tree.
+1 exactly it's like what's the point @matt_u
If so, SP would have been Craig’s curtain call and the , probably, long wait for the next Incarnation of Bond would have begun.
Maybe they just considered scrapping Craig's fifth movie, take another 6 month or a full year of rest and then start over with a new Bond. Not really quitting Bond for good. But yeah, I can't imagine the studio being happy with that.
I can't find the EW article, but it'd be interesting to see how much thought really went into considering this possibility. They hired Fukunaga only one month after Boyle's departure, after all. Unless maybe they put a deadline to themselves and decided that if they couldn't find a replacement director within, like, three months, then they would scrap everything.
https://ew.com/movies/2020/01/21/daniel-craig-rami-malek-no-time-to-die-cover/
Good point, I think Disney / Star Wars is the better example there. Beloved 40 year old film franchise, Disney promised to make a new Star Wars film every year until the sun goes out, Last Jedi, Solo, and Rise of Skywalker were relative failures at the box office. Now they’re backtracking.
In a Variety interview, EON didn't rule out the possibility of offering Bond content on a streaming service in the future.
For now, Broccoli says Bond’s future will remain on the big screen, but she doesn’t rule out the possibility that a future 007 adventure could debut on a streaming platform.
“We make these films for the audiences,” Broccoli says. “We like to think that they’re going to be seen primarily on the big screen. But having said that, we have to look to the future. Our fans are the ones who dictate how they want to consume their entertainment. I don’t think we can rule anything out, because it’s the audience that will make those decisions. Not us.”
People nowadays are so obsessed with continuity, world building and spin-offs that no one seemed to be able to think about the possibility that Nomi would be a one movie character within an already established 5 movies arc.
Exactly.
Nicely said @Walecs ... but with one more perspective: From the outside looking in, not only does this not appear to be sustainable artistically (the characters really don’t have enough to offer in this Bondverse), but it doesn’t stand a chance commercially. If there was a MP spin-off or The Adventures of Felix Leiter, who is the audience? Who are the filmmakers targeting? And for every one of these films, the big question leading up to it would be: Does James Bond make a cameo?
James Bond is the universe. He is front and centre, and unlike the Star Wars and Marvel worlds, his universe is not meant to be expanded. If even tried, it would collapse on itself.
However, from what I know, TRS was a big project for EoN and specifically for Gregg Wilson.
There is an expansion afoot— in the EoN universe: they are looking at expanding more into other mediums (they have so far dipped their toes into theatre and film and there’s some TV development going on too); for Gregg Wilson it seems like this was his puppy. Whenever B26 happens (with absolutely no intel on this, I am
assuming this will be quite a wait; MGM can re-package Bond films and Rocky films on digitial for the umpteenth time every few years to keep those cash cows going, but BB will be in no rush), Gregg Wilson will officially replace his father. TRS was a film where he was getting the experience to co-run the Big Show with his aunt. And the film is an experiment to see how the company carries another modestly budgeted IP. This will be another revenue stream for EoN.
Expanded Bondverse? I just can’t see the sustainability, commercially or artistically. But I think we will see an expansion of EoN’s universe over the next half decade or so.
That’s quite the analysis and intel and information and insight there, @peter! Thank you for explaining some of the inner workings at EON!
However, if I can be very blunt (at the risk of losing a lot of nuance from your post), we can summarise it thusly:
EON isn’t in a hurry to get started on the next Bond, but wants to spread its wings creatively, with other projects, including the possibility of more Rhythm Section films. And they rather would continue with these projects than to make Bond spin offs.
So can we then conclude that not only there will be a large gap in between NTTD and Bond 26, but that EON has no intention of churning out Bond films in a two-year cycle, instead preferring to make them when they feel for it?
And can we then further conclude that 4 to 5 year gaps will become the norm?
Or am I completely missing the point here?
@DeerAtTheGates it’s my personal belief that:
1/ with no intel, and I’m not in BB’s head, there is absolutely no rush to find Bond 007/B26. If there is a quick turn around, I will genuinely be very, very, very surprised. Very (very) surprised.
2/ I think EoN is definitely and already spreading its wings artistically with smaller films and commercially with TRS. I feel more is on the way in theatre, film and television. They have the luxury to explore, and they can fall back on the Bond franchise at any time (the only way I see a fast turn around on The next James Bond film is if they have some serious bombs; but they’re very smart and savvy filmmakers and their more artistic films are tight, lower budgets; TRS is modestly budgeted so over time in ancillary streams of revenue it should make its money back).
3/ once the new 007 is in place, I think they will spin the cycle efficiently (not every 2 years, but every 3 or 4 years; there’s always the case of the debut film being such a smash that they try and capitalize with a fast follow up in 2 or 2.5 years; I think the others will settle in that 3 year or 4 year gap).
4/ I based most of my original thoughts on what I was originally told about TRS (and how it was Gregg’s puppy; I know the stress was enormous and Lively injuring herself and the delay of filming mid-shoot created immense and intense strain. But the point is he survived and delivered a film that will be hitting cinemas in one week. EoN has my loyalty and $$$, so I will be there next Friday (plus I am curious how it does since I have my own female thriller out there at the moment; under option with some producers, we are looking at the numbers they do, not just in the theatre, but in all revenue streams)).
Bond Teams up with female agents and or women whose actions and skills either save his life or directly affect the plot in the following Films:
YOLT
TSWLM
Moonraker
FYEO
GoldenEye
TND
DAD
CR
QOS
Spectre
You're following the wrong franchise if its suddenly a problem now. Why is it a problem this time?
Read FYEO by Fleming. Melina Havelock tells bond to go to hell essentially and insists on being a part of the lakeside ambush. Good enough for Ian Fleming good enough for me.
LMAO at this post.
First of all, Bond was pretty much alone most of the time in GE, TND, DAD and CR. Natalya, Michelle Yeoh (forgot her character's name) and Jinx all joined at the very end whereas Mathis did not join up in the action.
Secondly, no one said it's "suddenly a problem this time". Read other people's posts before making criticisms and please restrain yourself from using whataboutism since that's a logical fallacy and it is VERY annoying.
Third; you've just mentioned all the Bond movies which have my least favourite third acts in the series (apart from CR and QoS and the former doesn't have a team up third act) so what kind of point are you trying to make here?
I'm telling you:
Fourth; I'm laughing at how you quoted Fleming to prove your point yet that very quote proves you're wrong. Talk about own goal. Fleming's Bond has always been a lonely person and he prefers to work on his own (although he did occasionally team up with Quarrel and Leiter), so much so that other people have to insist on being part of their ambush.
Fifth; "you're following the wrong franchise". Ah yes, some good ol' gatekeeping about what people can and should or can't and shouldn't enjoy. You don't like a certain thing about a movie franchise? Well then you shouldn't even watch Bond movies at all, I get to decide it.
No own goal, perhaps you haven't read TMWTGG, OHMSS.... Bond is very happy to see Felix, who incidentally saves his arse on the train. Oh and so does Tracy. Have you seen the end of YOLT, or TSWLM. Big team ups there - Japanese ninjas, Navy... Kerim Bay etc etc
Maybe Bond does prefer to work alone. Thats unfortunate because a lot of the time he's forced into collaborating for the good of the mission. Maybe he will in NTTD. Maybe not. And the FYEO example shows how Bond is forced into collaborating whether he likes it or not. I think the same will happen in NTTD. Maybe against his will, but or the good of the mission
Nuance.....
When you say Bond teaming up is bad we can’t possibly know all of the small print attached to that (it’s actually okay as long as it’s not with someone specifically from MI6, although some of them are fine depending on whether they have guns or something, or happens in the last bit of the film etc.).
Whataboutism isn't a counter argument, it's a logical fallacy used to win an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
The world’s isn’t so binary.
I actually think you’ve missed the subtlety of whataboutery. Its mainly Using similar unconnected examples to discredit. Like an ad hominem attack distracts from the argument . We’re talking about inconsistency of opinion and contradiction in one film franchise.
It’s also too late to argue with strangers online. 👍🏻
She didn’t work for MI6 though: apparently it’s only the MI6 ones which are bad..? It’s a very confusing set of rules.
We don't know if it's similar to Jinx-- and hopefully not since Fukunaga is a superior story-teller and wouldn't stoop to the stereotypical "yo momma" idiocies of DAD.