›

The What if Amazon succeeds and makes Bond a streaming only film model?

1…686970717274»

Comments

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2024 Posts: 3,181
    For myself, I'd rather have ideas kept for the actual Bond films, rather than turn the series into a franchise by diffusing them among various spin-offs. I can see why Amazon might want to follow the current model, but I agree with Darth Dimi that the end result would likely be a reduction in quality and eventually a lowering of interest that, at best, could make Bond less than it is and, at worst, lead to the end of the series.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,688
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    One spin-off I can always imagine is one starring Scaramanga (the film version, more or less), because he's basically a version of Bond, or could be: he's smooth and suave and stylish and lives in an expensive world, kills people, has gadgets etc. He lives in a slightly more edgy side of the road, and these spin-off things do like to look at the villains, like Penguin.

    But as Dimi says, that would only really work because it's kind of giving you the Bond character and everything that people watch Bond for, albeit without actual 007. Other spin-offs I struggle to see slightly; I especially think one about another, different 00 wouldn't really work, because if it's 005 or whoever taking on the kind of villains that Bond takes down, getting briefings from M etc. then why am I not just watching Bond?

    Perfectly stated, @mtm. I agree.

    One that I could, perhaps, see, is a miniseries dealing with "the rise of Blofeld", from forgotten foster brother to the head of the world's most sinister and mightiest crime organization. Except that... well... not too many people seem to have embraced this version of Blofeld. On the other hand, a good miniseries might have corrected that a little. But Blofeld and the Craig universe are gone, so I doubt anyone would be interested.

    I think maybe, if it were ten years ago, Naomie Harris' Moneypenny could potentially have had her own series. Not being a Bond-a-like, but perhaps a bit more of a low key, London-centric spy show. I think she would have been strong enough to carry it and the characters were popular around that time. But yeah, can't do it now the Craig films are over, time's moved on.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    edited December 2024 Posts: 1,487
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    They can make a series with 008. A woman or a black guy.

    And it would have nothing to do with the world of Bond, so what's the point? Just construct a completely independent spy series starring an MI6 agent.

    It can have M and Moneypeny. And they could do all the silly things without ruining Bond.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,044
    I like the exclusivity of Bond. I prefer no spinoffs that would essentially be Bond lite.
  • bondywondybondywondy Uk
    edited December 2024 Posts: 379
    Regarding the possibility Amazon release Bond 26 as a streaming only film...

    The global box office has shrunk dramatically since Covid-19. Very few films are making over 700 million worldwide and a tiny amount hit the big 1 billion mark. Prior to Covid, Disney broke box office records by having nine films make 1 billion dollars in the year 2019.

    In 2019, Disney broke the record for the most movies to surpass $1 billion worldwide in a calendar year with nine films:
    Captain Marvel: Marvel Studios' film grossed $1.13 billion
    Avengers: Endgame: Marvel Studios' film grossed $2.8 billion and became Disney's highest grossing film of all time
    Aladdin: Disney live-action's film grossed $1.05 billion
    The Lion King: Disney live-action's film grossed $1.66 billion
    Toy Story 4: Pixar's film grossed $1.07 billion
    Frozen II: Walt Disney Animation's film grossed $1.26 billion
    Spider-Man: Far From Home: Grossed $1.132 billion
    Disney's total box office for 2019 was $11.1 billion worldwide.

    I doubt anything close to those stats will ever happen again. However....

    Disney had a catastrophic year in 2020 when covid hit and everything was closed for months. Disney went from huge record breaking profit to deficit. The global box office dropped a staggering 80 percent in 2020. The industry has not recovered. Only two films have made over a billion dollars in 2024.

    1 - Inside Out 2
    2 - Deadpool & Wolverine.

    And just six films made over 500 million. Will Bond 26 make more than 500 million? Very likely. More than 750 million? Probably not. Close to a billion? I'm guessing no.

    Maybe Amazon don't care about the box office. They've no reason to want to share their box office profits with the cinema chains. The chains take approximately half the box office. If Amazon go straight to video streaming/streaming rental/retail with Bond 26 the cinema chains get not one cent! 🤭
    Most movies released on Amazon Prime Video are primarily straight to streaming. This means they are available for subscribers to watch as part of their Prime membership without any additional rental fees.

    However, there are also titles that are available for rental or purchase. Here’s a quick breakdown:

    Straight to Streaming: Many original films, like The Tomorrow War and Borat Subsequent Moviefilm, are released directly for streaming.
    Rental/Purchase Options: Some newer or popular titles may be available for rent or purchase, allowing users to access them without a Prime subscription.

    I'm guessing Bond 26 would be free on Amazon Prime (obviously) but then available to rent/buy for non Prime customers soon after or on release date. Amazon would get more customers signing up to Prime to see Bond 26 and the rest of the customer base would pay the rental fee. That's a lot of cash coming in? I assume so. I don't know it's enough to make Bond 26 profitable though. But if more people join Amazon Prime as a result of Bond 26 exclusively on Amazon then over time the extra money coming in should cover the cost of making Bond 26. It's possible Amazon do want to make Bond 26 or future Bond films straight to vod (video on demand) but Eon are resistant to that idea/strategy and that could be one of the reasons for the alleged impasse.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,494
    The problem there is, Amazon can release the film in theatres, make 700 million and then release it on prime/to rent and make money that way too.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,044
    Looking for some clarity. What exactly is the business relationship between Amazon and EON? Can either make a Bond film without the other?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,258
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Looking for some clarity. What exactly is the business relationship between Amazon and EON? Can either make a Bond film without the other?

    Amazon owns MGM, which bought half the rights to Danjaq, and the other half is the Broccoli family. Quite literally neither can make Bond without the other. MGM when briefly run by Pathe in the early 90s tried doing things with the Bond films that Cubby didn’t approve of, which is partly why there was a lawsuit that put Bond 17 on hold for six years.

    So if Amazon tried doing anything that touches Bond and Eon is not on board, they can sue Amazon.
Sign In or Register to comment.