007 heading to streaming? Amazon buys MGM for $8.45 billion!

1161719212230

Comments

  • Posts: 3,164
    It’ll be interesting to see how this pans out.

    I’m surprised Universal is doing 26. I could have sworn I read reports that the deal they made with MGM/EON was strictly for NTTD?

    Originally yes but until today they've kept the news of them having 26 on the down low it seems.
  • Posts: 16,204
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'd assume this deal assures a faster turn around for the next couple of films.
    Hypothetically if 5-6 years were to become the norm between films, then Warner Bros would've signed a deal that doesn't take effect until around the time of the franchise's 70th anniversary.
    B26 in 2026
    B27 in 2032.

    Please don’t jinx it. But this may be a sign that EON are along further then we realize.

    I sincerely hope so ( in Connery's voice). It's great that the distribution deal doesn't seem to be an issue this time. Feels like we waited an eternity after SPECTRE before Eon got that problem solved for NTTD,
  • edited August 2022 Posts: 440
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'd assume this deal assures a faster turn around for the next couple of films.
    Hypothetically if 5-6 years were to become the norm between films, then Warner Bros would've signed a deal that doesn't take effect until around the time of the franchise's 70th anniversary.
    B26 in 2026
    B27 in 2032.

    Please don’t jinx it. But this may be a sign that EON are along further then we realize.

    I sincerely hope so ( in Connery's voice). It's great that the distribution deal doesn't seem to be an issue this time. Feels like we waited an eternity after SPECTRE before Eon got that problem solved for NTTD,

    Yes, for as much criticism as the Craig era has gotten for longer gaps between films. It's worth remembering that only QOS and SP didn't have to contend with distribution and internal MGM reshuffling.

  • Posts: 1,650
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'd assume this deal assures a faster turn around for the next couple of films.
    Hypothetically if 5-6 years were to become the norm between films, then Warner Bros would've signed a deal that doesn't take effect until around the time of the franchise's 70th anniversary.
    B26 in 2026
    B27 in 2032.

    Please don’t jinx it. But this may be a sign that EON are along further then we realize.

    Please don't WHAT it ? There's a thorough post a few posts up the chain which concerns the idea of producing films for a variety of characters who have appeared in Bond films, books, etc. Jinx, of course, is one of them and Halle B looks SUPER great and ready to this day ! But, of course, since she lived, to, you know, die ANOTHER day...
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I'd assume this deal assures a faster turn around for the next couple of films.
    Hypothetically if 5-6 years were to become the norm between films, then Warner Bros would've signed a deal that doesn't take effect until around the time of the franchise's 70th anniversary.
    B26 in 2026
    B27 in 2032.

    Please don’t jinx it. But this may be a sign that EON are along further then we realize.

    I sincerely hope so ( in Connery's voice). It's great that the distribution deal doesn't seem to be an issue this time. Feels like we waited an eternity after SPECTRE before Eon got that problem solved for NTTD,

    Yes, for as much criticism as the Craig era has gotten for longer gaps between films. It's worth remembering that only QOS and SP didn't have to contend with distribution and internal MGM reshuffling.

    This is an excellent point. Interestingly, if Sam Mendes didn’t have his prior commitments, we might have actually got a Bond 24 in 2014 which would probably have been a different film. For example: Dave Bautista would have likely not been selected as the henchman. GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY made his acting career, and that came out in Aug 2014, which would have been well after a hypothetical Bond 24 production in 2014.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    James Bond bosses agree deal to keep spy franchise on screen until at least 2037
    https://mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/james-bond-bosses-agree-deal-27792806
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    James Bond bosses agree deal to keep spy franchise on screen until at least 2037
    https://mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/james-bond-bosses-agree-deal-27792806

    Interesting if true.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,007
    I sure hope we're well past the 27th installment by 2037.
  • Posts: 16,204
    Excellent news!
  • Posts: 12,514
    I’m holding out a small bit of hope that we’re going to get films a little faster after the gap between NTTD to the next one.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited August 2022 Posts: 13,901
    So the franchise will last beyond the 2035 mandate prohibiting the sale of new gasoline- and diesel-consuming automobiles.

    Cool.

  • Posts: 12,526
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    James Bond bosses agree deal to keep spy franchise on screen until at least 2037
    https://mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/james-bond-bosses-agree-deal-27792806

    But how many movies will we get by that deadline?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    Looks like Bond is Back (on Prime)

    Fd1aQ2oXwAAfaGF?format=jpg&name=medium
  • Ohh I like that poster , the orange 007 logo is awesome!
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    I think this will be the first time ALL the Eon films are under the same streaming service. Whenever Prime or Netflix had Bond films there was always the odd film or two missing from the catalog.
  • Posts: 1,864
    Nice poster except that Connery should be in the middle position.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    I think this will be the first time ALL the Eon films are under the same streaming service. Whenever Prime or Netflix had Bond films there was always the odd film or two missing from the catalog.

    Well they were all on Prime here earlier in the year :)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    mtm wrote: »
    I think this will be the first time ALL the Eon films are under the same streaming service. Whenever Prime or Netflix had Bond films there was always the odd film or two missing from the catalog.

    Well they were all on Prime here earlier in the year :)

    Was SP too? Here in the states that was the one that was not available on Prime.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Matthew Belloni from Puck on the state of MGM and Bond post-merger.
    Amazon closed the MGM deal in March, after having 10 months to plan for it during the approval process. And, shortly thereafter, Hopkins announced that Mike De Luca and Pam Abdy, who had run the studio since early 2020, would exit. Yet now here we are, nearing October: De Luca and Abdy have long since started at Warner Bros, and the MGM film job is still open. MGM staff hasn’t even been fully assimilated into the Amazon Borg yet, though that’s finally happening this month, I’m told. In the interim, several lower-level people have started to leave, with many wondering about the actual strategy for MGM.

    Some of the delay is just Amazon digesting the MGM financials, which are said to be more concerning than they realized, pre-close. Plus there’s Amazon’s infamous “leveling” process, where new employees are evaluated and assigned a number from 4 to 12 to determine salary and reporting structure (there’s no 9, for some reason known only to Jeff Bezos). That takes time, especially since Amazon is still primarily filled with tech people, and all these MGM employees are definitely not tech people. The 4s are lower-level employees, like administrative assistants, for instance, and Amazon Studios head Jennifer Salke is a 10. Everyone at Amazon is an at-will employee—no contracts, no sparkly golden parachutes—another contrast from MGM.

    But a big reason for the delay in finding a film studio leader is the sheer difficulty of the hire. Amazon wants 10-12 movies a year from MGM, most of them headed for theaters before Prime, so it needs a seasoned executive who can actually put together greenlight-able theatrical projects, has good taste as well as filmmaker relationships—and, most importantly, can work within Amazon’s insular, data-driven, no-frills culture. They want experience, but, oh yeah, the person has to be willing to report to Salke, who has very little film experience of her own. She has mostly taken over the search process, while her deputy, movies head Julie Rapaport, helps run MGM day-to-day. The Salke reporting structure has eliminated a host of the usual-suspect candidates.

    So, who will it be? Not Emma Watts, late of Paramount, who went through the process and either dropped out or was told she should drop out. And Scott Stuber is staying at Netflix (for now). A couple others have engaged, the latest being Courtenay Valenti, who is leaving Warner Bros. as president of production and development. It would be funny, if not a little depressing (and very Hollywood), if Warners and MGM just swapped executives—and even funnier since De Luca formerly ran Warners’ New Line division in his pre-MGM days. Is there really no star exec out there in their 30s on whom Salke could take a chance? Of all the studios, Amazon seems like it could do this because its other businesses give its content group such a cushion. But that would require actual risk-taking, once a hallmark of the film business. These days in Hollywood, we usually just see an executive version of musical chairs.

    Whoever gets the MGM job, restarting the James Bond franchise will be the top priority. The weirdness of the current situation was on full display at the Will Rogers Pioneer Dinner last week when Bond producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson were honored at the charity event. I was out of town, but a couple Amazon/MGM attendees I talked to noted the awkwardness. MGM, which shares Bond with the Broccolis (though the family retains full creative control), sponsored the event with its releasing division and Amazon Studios. Yet seated directly to Broccoli’s left was Kevin Ulrich, the Anchorage Capital hedge fund dude who offloaded the studio to Amazon and now has nothing to do with it. Daniel Craig was on her right, and Amy Pascal, the former co-chair of Sony Pictures, who distributed several of Craig’s Bond pics yet also has nothing to do with the franchise now, was deemed worthy of Broccoli’s table, too. Jon Glickman and Gary Barber, who both previously ran MGM before being abruptly fired by Ulrich, were seated with Wilson, alongside Bond alums Christoph Waltz and Michelle Yeoh.

    Not with the Broccolis: Anyone from Amazon. Hopkins was seated with his executives at the table in front of Barbara (Salke was on vacation and not there), while executive chairman Bezos, who okayed the MGM acquisition in the first place, appeared only in a tribute video—holding a martini glass, of course.

    It might seem trivial, but these are highly choreographed and telling decisions. The Broccolis are relationship-driven producers, they alone decide when and how to make Bond movies, and the Amazon people just don’t have that relationship. “I’ve never spoken to Jeff Bezos,” Broccoli said bluntly in December, though I’m told that has since changed. Glickman’s speech at the event drove that point home; if the Broccolis like you, they will engage, he told the crowd. And at this point, Hopkins—and, importantly, whoever takes that MGM film job—kinda needs them to engage.

    After all, a key justification for Hopkins paying all those billions for MGM was a pipeline of new Bond movies, and, at this point, the Broccolis are looking at 2025 as the earliest for the next installment. Anytime Barbara or Michael do press, as they did for the Will Rogers honor, there’s a new round of dumb speculation about the timeline and the next 007. But everyone at MGM knows they aren’t even close to a new film. Starting next year, the Broccolis will map out a plan, according to multiple sources. They’ll commission a script, decide on a filmmaker, and start meeting with actors, likely younger than even Craig was when he took over the role at 34. The Broccolis want the next Bond to similarly commit to multiple movies and play the role for 10 to 15 years in success. By the end of his run, Craig was 50 years old and had injured himself on set in Jamaica, forcing costly delays.

    That said, the Broccolis know that this is the family business. New Bond movies drive Eon, their production company, and allow it to do smaller movies like Till, about Emmet Till’s mother Mamie-Till Mobley, which Amazon will release next month. Plus, Wilson is now 80, so Broccoli will soon be fully in charge, to the extent she isn’t already.

    Amazon, which isn’t used to the lack of control over a major asset like this, would love to alter the relationship, to expand the franchise and better incorporate it into Prime Video, and there have been rumors that the company is prepared to write Barbara and Michael a massive check to make that happen. I’ll believe it when I see it. To that end, Amazon has also shifted into full courtship mode, plugging the hell out of Bond movies on the Prime Video interface and launching a 60th Anniversary activation, which seems to be aimed at an audience of two.

    The MGM film hire is key to that courtship, as well as helping make the next Bond movie good. To put it bluntly: Barbara needs to like this person. Amazon has smartly pivoted from its initial years as a bespoke prestige platform to a broad-as-possible offering with content like Jack Ryan, Coming to America 2, and, now, Rings of Power. Bond fits squarely in that wheelhouse. This week, Amazon announced that Epix, the MGM-owned movie channel, will be rebranded MGM+ and continue as a separate service offered through Prime Video—the Hollywood version of a You May Also Like button.

    Sure, fine, whatever. Despite the recent revamp of its interface, the whole platform still feels like a video shopping experience rather than a curated streaming service. Ten to 12 decent MGM movies a year, and one blockbuster Bond movie every few years, could pair very nicely with the NFL and Lord of the Rings. And that would be a very good talking point for Amazon.
  • edited September 2022 Posts: 784
    Streaming services lack that personal soulful touch that individual proprietors and small production houses give films. I would not interfere.

    I was for spinoffs before, but it will indeed dilute the brand. Amazon is in it for the long term and should not max out early like Disney, Netflix and HBO.

    I would continue looking for IP, in markets they are hoping to expand the entire business, that middle-aged people and kids are familiar with. Things that were considered bad before might come off as quirky, retro and hip today.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,356
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    Matthew Belloni from Puck on the state of MGM and Bond post-merger.
    Amazon closed the MGM deal in March, after having 10 months to plan for it during the approval process. And, shortly thereafter, Hopkins announced that Mike De Luca and Pam Abdy, who had run the studio since early 2020, would exit. Yet now here we are, nearing October: De Luca and Abdy have long since started at Warner Bros, and the MGM film job is still open. MGM staff hasn’t even been fully assimilated into the Amazon Borg yet, though that’s finally happening this month, I’m told. In the interim, several lower-level people have started to leave, with many wondering about the actual strategy for MGM.

    Some of the delay is just Amazon digesting the MGM financials, which are said to be more concerning than they realized, pre-close. Plus there’s Amazon’s infamous “leveling” process, where new employees are evaluated and assigned a number from 4 to 12 to determine salary and reporting structure (there’s no 9, for some reason known only to Jeff Bezos). That takes time, especially since Amazon is still primarily filled with tech people, and all these MGM employees are definitely not tech people. The 4s are lower-level employees, like administrative assistants, for instance, and Amazon Studios head Jennifer Salke is a 10. Everyone at Amazon is an at-will employee—no contracts, no sparkly golden parachutes—another contrast from MGM.

    But a big reason for the delay in finding a film studio leader is the sheer difficulty of the hire. Amazon wants 10-12 movies a year from MGM, most of them headed for theaters before Prime, so it needs a seasoned executive who can actually put together greenlight-able theatrical projects, has good taste as well as filmmaker relationships—and, most importantly, can work within Amazon’s insular, data-driven, no-frills culture. They want experience, but, oh yeah, the person has to be willing to report to Salke, who has very little film experience of her own. She has mostly taken over the search process, while her deputy, movies head Julie Rapaport, helps run MGM day-to-day. The Salke reporting structure has eliminated a host of the usual-suspect candidates.

    So, who will it be? Not Emma Watts, late of Paramount, who went through the process and either dropped out or was told she should drop out. And Scott Stuber is staying at Netflix (for now). A couple others have engaged, the latest being Courtenay Valenti, who is leaving Warner Bros. as president of production and development. It would be funny, if not a little depressing (and very Hollywood), if Warners and MGM just swapped executives—and even funnier since De Luca formerly ran Warners’ New Line division in his pre-MGM days. Is there really no star exec out there in their 30s on whom Salke could take a chance? Of all the studios, Amazon seems like it could do this because its other businesses give its content group such a cushion. But that would require actual risk-taking, once a hallmark of the film business. These days in Hollywood, we usually just see an executive version of musical chairs.

    Whoever gets the MGM job, restarting the James Bond franchise will be the top priority. The weirdness of the current situation was on full display at the Will Rogers Pioneer Dinner last week when Bond producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson were honored at the charity event. I was out of town, but a couple Amazon/MGM attendees I talked to noted the awkwardness. MGM, which shares Bond with the Broccolis (though the family retains full creative control), sponsored the event with its releasing division and Amazon Studios. Yet seated directly to Broccoli’s left was Kevin Ulrich, the Anchorage Capital hedge fund dude who offloaded the studio to Amazon and now has nothing to do with it. Daniel Craig was on her right, and Amy Pascal, the former co-chair of Sony Pictures, who distributed several of Craig’s Bond pics yet also has nothing to do with the franchise now, was deemed worthy of Broccoli’s table, too. Jon Glickman and Gary Barber, who both previously ran MGM before being abruptly fired by Ulrich, were seated with Wilson, alongside Bond alums Christoph Waltz and Michelle Yeoh.

    Not with the Broccolis: Anyone from Amazon. Hopkins was seated with his executives at the table in front of Barbara (Salke was on vacation and not there), while executive chairman Bezos, who okayed the MGM acquisition in the first place, appeared only in a tribute video—holding a martini glass, of course.

    It might seem trivial, but these are highly choreographed and telling decisions. The Broccolis are relationship-driven producers, they alone decide when and how to make Bond movies, and the Amazon people just don’t have that relationship. “I’ve never spoken to Jeff Bezos,” Broccoli said bluntly in December, though I’m told that has since changed. Glickman’s speech at the event drove that point home; if the Broccolis like you, they will engage, he told the crowd. And at this point, Hopkins—and, importantly, whoever takes that MGM film job—kinda needs them to engage.

    After all, a key justification for Hopkins paying all those billions for MGM was a pipeline of new Bond movies, and, at this point, the Broccolis are looking at 2025 as the earliest for the next installment. Anytime Barbara or Michael do press, as they did for the Will Rogers honor, there’s a new round of dumb speculation about the timeline and the next 007. But everyone at MGM knows they aren’t even close to a new film. Starting next year, the Broccolis will map out a plan, according to multiple sources. They’ll commission a script, decide on a filmmaker, and start meeting with actors, likely younger than even Craig was when he took over the role at 34. The Broccolis want the next Bond to similarly commit to multiple movies and play the role for 10 to 15 years in success. By the end of his run, Craig was 50 years old and had injured himself on set in Jamaica, forcing costly delays.

    That said, the Broccolis know that this is the family business. New Bond movies drive Eon, their production company, and allow it to do smaller movies like Till, about Emmet Till’s mother Mamie-Till Mobley, which Amazon will release next month. Plus, Wilson is now 80, so Broccoli will soon be fully in charge, to the extent she isn’t already.

    Amazon, which isn’t used to the lack of control over a major asset like this, would love to alter the relationship, to expand the franchise and better incorporate it into Prime Video, and there have been rumors that the company is prepared to write Barbara and Michael a massive check to make that happen. I’ll believe it when I see it. To that end, Amazon has also shifted into full courtship mode, plugging the hell out of Bond movies on the Prime Video interface and launching a 60th Anniversary activation, which seems to be aimed at an audience of two.

    The MGM film hire is key to that courtship, as well as helping make the next Bond movie good. To put it bluntly: Barbara needs to like this person. Amazon has smartly pivoted from its initial years as a bespoke prestige platform to a broad-as-possible offering with content like Jack Ryan, Coming to America 2, and, now, Rings of Power. Bond fits squarely in that wheelhouse. This week, Amazon announced that Epix, the MGM-owned movie channel, will be rebranded MGM+ and continue as a separate service offered through Prime Video—the Hollywood version of a You May Also Like button.

    Sure, fine, whatever. Despite the recent revamp of its interface, the whole platform still feels like a video shopping experience rather than a curated streaming service. Ten to 12 decent MGM movies a year, and one blockbuster Bond movie every few years, could pair very nicely with the NFL and Lord of the Rings. And that would be a very good talking point for Amazon.

    Isn't the smart money on Amy Pascal, again? The massive success of CR and SF outweigh QoS and SP.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    mtm wrote: »
    I think this will be the first time ALL the Eon films are under the same streaming service. Whenever Prime or Netflix had Bond films there was always the odd film or two missing from the catalog.

    Well they were all on Prime here earlier in the year :)

    Was SP too? Here in the states that was the one that was not available on Prime.

    Everything from Dr No to NTTD, including NSNA, CR67 and Everything or Nothing.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,201
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I think this will be the first time ALL the Eon films are under the same streaming service. Whenever Prime or Netflix had Bond films there was always the odd film or two missing from the catalog.

    Well they were all on Prime here earlier in the year :)

    Was SP too? Here in the states that was the one that was not available on Prime.

    Everything from Dr No to NTTD, including NSNA, CR67 and Everything or Nothing.

    Lucky UK! Now we’re just finally catching up.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    Posts: 2,579
    Most of us on this forum i would think have the bond dvd or bluray sets so bezos video can get stuffed..... :))
    The bonus features on the sets are priceless. :)>-
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,573
    Surely everyone watches films on streaming that they have on their shelf, don't they? I'm not going to walk all the way over there :P
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,007
    Streaming is so inferior to physical media to me, especially when titles come and go with little to no warning sometimes.
  • Posts: 12,514
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Streaming is so inferior to physical media to me, especially when titles come and go with little to no warning sometimes.

    Amen. Still waiting on that updated collection for Bond.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited October 2022 Posts: 7,588
    mtm wrote: »
    Surely everyone watches films on streaming that they have on their shelf, don't they? I'm not going to walk all the way over there :P

    I do this. :( I also am using an Xbox One X as my bluray player and sometimes there is a shifting around of HDMI cables that need to be done... what a hassle.

    But I also agree with Creasy, streaming is definitely inferior. I have a phobia of relying on a strong, steady internet connection. I call it Telusphobia.
  • Posts: 12,526
    mtm wrote: »
    Looks like Bond is Back (on Prime)

    Fd1aQ2oXwAAfaGF?format=jpg&name=medium

    Its as if they are armed with pads and pens for some serious train spotting!!!! :-B
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    edited October 2022 Posts: 2,545
    Amazon Studios Head Jennifer Salke Breaks Down the $700 Million ‘Rings of Power’ Gamble and Plan for MGM Integration
    https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/jennifer-salke-rings-of-power-amazon-five-seasons-mgm-1235392108/

    It’s been almost seven months since Amazon closed its $8.5 billion acquisition of MGM. Do you have clarity on how Amazon Studios and MGM will coexist?

    You’re going to see us investing, as a company, even more in film. You’ll see more investment and more expansive opportunities for film. You’ll see more fluidity between theatrical and streaming options for films. And then there’s a TV team that’s still working on great shows that exist outside our company. And we’re looking forward to more collaboration as time goes on.

    Will Amazon Studios continue to make movies for theatrical release?

    Yes, we will. With all the IP and our growing strategy around film, there’s going to be more opportunity.
Sign In or Register to comment.