EoN sells up - Amazon MGM to produce 007 going forwards

13468917

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 20 Posts: 17,088
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Round it off with Cavill as Bond and Matthew Vaughn or the Russo Brothers in the director's chair and you'd have the ultimate "Bond-as-content" product for the consumers.

    Oh man, that sounds horribly believable.

    Are good directors etc. going to want to work with Amazon?
  • Oh no. Thanks Barbara. What happened to you calling them f g idiots
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,299
    Oh no. Thanks Barbara. What happened to you calling them f g idiots

    Amazon had more money than God. It was just a matter of time for Barbara to break.
  • Posts: 2,033
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    I wish people wouldn’t be so down on this decision. Yes I understand the hesitation. But I say let’s give Amazon a chance. Let’s see the movie they produce. Let’s see their casting choices, their director choices, etc..

    I wish they wouldn't have given over creative control to Amazon, but alas. There is literally no reason for me to be even slightly optimistic about this. If they want to prove me wrong in the future, I'm all for it, but as it stands now, I feel nothing but pessimism regarding this decision.

    Thats fair
  • edited February 20 Posts: 1,615
    mtm wrote: »
    slide_99 wrote: »
    Round it off with Cavill as Bond and Matthew Vaughn or the Russo Brothers in the director's chair and you'd have the ultimate "Bond-as-content" product for the consumers.

    Oh man, that sounds horribly believable.

    Are good directors etc. going to want to work with Amazon?

    Why not? They have money. Plus, directors may have more freedom than with EON.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,091
    Oh no. Thanks Barbara. What happened to you calling them f g idiots

    $$$$$.
  • This move from BB is almost as bad as the American public voting the orange one back into power. Tune changed very quickly . Let’s hope the idiots at Amazon as she called them rather less politely don’t do a Star Wars with Bond and dilute the franchise
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,346
    I can’t deny that I feel really melancholy about this news, even tho it seemed pretty clear that an EoN/Amazon collaboration was never gonna work.
    Bond as we knew is done. It is not a family business anymore. Now it will be just “content”.
    Let’s see how it goes. I wanna be optimistic - especially since I’m enjoying what Amazon is doing with Rings of Power even tho a lot of people seem to hate it - and I hope they will look at what Disney did with Star Wars as an example of what NOT to do.
  • Posts: 17,868
    I'm not sure how I feel about this personally. Honestly, I'd be more optimistic if it were Apple rather than Amazon, given their success with shows like Slow Horses. Now that this cat is out of the bag, I wonder how long it’ll be before we hear more about the next film.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,612
    matt_u wrote: »
    I can’t deny that I feel really melancholy about this news, even tho it seemed pretty clear that an EoN/Amazon collaboration was never gonna work.
    Bond as we knew is done. It is not a family business anymore. Now it will be just “content”.
    Let’s see how it goes. I wanna be optimistic - especially since I’m enjoying what Amazon is doing with Rings of Power even tho a lot of people seem to hate it - and I hope they will look at what Disney did with Star Wars as an example of what NOT to do.

    I think Amazon has produced some really good stuff. But they have also produced a ton of crap--which can be said of any studio/production company.

    There are a lot of fans who were not happy with the direction Babs and Michael had taken the franchise. In that regard, this seems like a case of "Be careful what you wish for."

    Ultimately, Babs and Michael were getting up there in age, and it was a matter of time before they had to step down. It just would have been nice to keep it within the family, somehow.

    We shall see...

  • zb007zb007 UK
    Posts: 94
    gutted by this really concerning what they will do with it
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,649
    I'm not sure how I feel about this personally. Honestly, I'd be more optimistic if it were Apple rather than Amazon, given their success with shows like Slow Horses. Now that this cat is out of the bag, I wonder how long it’ll be before we hear more about the next film.

    Well, one potential upside we no longer have to wait out CCBB and Othello, preproduction can go right ahead! /:)
  • Posts: 731
    Nooo. Why couldn’t ten cent buy Bond instead? What a tragedy!
  • edited February 20 Posts: 4,421
    Serious question: Considering it won't be a Eon film, would this be Bond 26 or Bond 1? Would this be considered part of the linage of the Broccoli series?
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited February 20 Posts: 18,454
    Well, this has certainly been shocking and unexpected news. That's especially the case after Barbara Broccoli had been reported as saying Amazon were "effing idiots". It's just sad to see Eon and the Broccolis give up creative control to a conglomerate like Amazon after 64 years in charge of the film Bond. We were lucky that we got 25 good films out of the deal.

    That said, I don't want to pre-judge Amazon taking over Bond. Hopefully Barbara and Michael will still be there as backseat observers and they will continue to have an input. So they're not totally gone from Bond. No doubt Amazon made Eon an "offer they couldn't refuse" and they took them up on the offer. Perhaps this was inevitable given that Amazon had bought over MGM/UA and it would only be a matter of time before they'd want the Bond films too? More positively, maybe it will open up some new sources for adaptation that Eon were disinclined to use such as the Bond continuation novels. That would be interesting to see and one positive in all the negatives that this news has engendered today. I always try to think in positive terms and sometimes things work out for the best. I hope this is the case with this news, as surprising as it is to hear today.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,674
    Serious question: Considering it won't be a Eon film, would this be Bond 26 or Bond 1? Would this be considered part of the linage of the Broccoli series?

    That's what worries me

    I do wonder whether Barbara and Michael planned to sell before Amazon bought MGM? NTTD felt like a goodbye to the fans from the producers, as much as it did Daniel
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,261
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Serious question: Considering it won't be a Eon film, would this be Bond 26 or Bond 1? Would this be considered part of the linage of the Broccoli series?

    That's what worries me

    I do wonder whether Barbara and Michael planned to sell before Amazon bought MGM? NTTD felt like a goodbye to the fans from the producers, as much as it did Daniel

    I think if that was the case then this news would likely have broken sooner.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,649
    It's crazy how everything has gone out the window, just like that, and we need to entirely reformat our thinking.

    Autumn release dates might not be a thing anymore, the next film could be released summer 2027 (if Amazon want to fast track they have the money).

    What about this - the chances of a Bond trilogy just increased massively, because we know EON like to lock an actor down for 5 plus films, but who knows, maybe amazon are happy to chop and change actors every few years.
  • Posts: 386
    It was pretty obvious that post Craig BB's heart wasn't really in Bond anymore and that's her right I guess. It actually makes me hate NTTD even more knowing that it was the end of proper Bond. My sympathies go out to the Bond family, the people who've worked tirelessly on Bond movies for twenty or thirty years. Will Amazon carry on using these great artists, will they carry on working out of pinewood or switch the whole operation to the US. I hope not. I certainly had my issues with BB's stewardship of Bond, the movies veried widely in quality but it's still a sad day for Bond fans.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,674
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Serious question: Considering it won't be a Eon film, would this be Bond 26 or Bond 1? Would this be considered part of the linage of the Broccoli series?

    That's what worries me

    I do wonder whether Barbara and Michael planned to sell before Amazon bought MGM? NTTD felt like a goodbye to the fans from the producers, as much as it did Daniel

    I think if that was the case then this news would likely have broken sooner.

    That's a good point mate, I think you're probably right.

    I just get the feeling that around NTTD the energy to begin again wasn't there, it felt like the end.
    I remember Calvin Dyson mentioning that Barbara gave a small speech thanking Michael for being the best producing partner she could hope for at the premiere of NTTD too, that was probably just to toast Michael.

    I realise I'm clutching at straws here, but I'm just in disbelief I guess. It feels like this has come out of nowhere.
  • edited February 20 Posts: 2,941
    The longevity of the Bond series is entirely because of the Brocolli family. Studio executives come and go, and if an IP underperforms the studio can drop it and move on to something else that's more fashionable. Dropping Bond wasn't an option for Cubby or his immediate successors, who kept the series going no matter what, even after Saltzman left and United Artists began falling apart. A family business may make mistakes, but it will always have a closer, more protective attachment to its product than an entirely corporate enterprise. Cubby was a lifetime executive for James Bond, not a studio.

    In the short term, Amazon's success with Bond will hinge on the executive it appoints to lead the series onward. If the right executive is chosen, he or she might be able to produce a few new Bond films that might be better than some of Craig's. But that executive won't be there forever. Cubby, Barbara, and Michael had to keep Bond going if they wanted to stay in the film business. Amazon has no such obligation to Bond, and whenever the series underperforms its future will be imperilled.
  • SimonSimon Keeping The British End Up...
    Posts: 165
    I can't readily recall anything that MGM Amazon has released, but honestly I'm not as doom filled as some.

    Worst case scenario is Amazon does to Bond what Disney did to Star Wars, but I don't really see that as being as significantly worse than the total dearth of Bond we currently have. In 10 years we've had 2 movies - 1 completely divisive, 1 completely boring, so I wouldn't personally subscribe to the idea its been quality over quantity currently.

    If the next 10 years rolls out the Bond equivalent dross as Book of Boba Fett or Obi Wan then I can happily bypass those as I did the actual Boba Fett and Obi Wan... and Die Another Day, NTTD, DAF...

    Even if it takes a couple of crap films for Amazon to hopefully find their way, its not as if Bond is immune to some truly terrible movies - lets face it, after TSWLM in '77, it was a decade of poor to middling Bond until '87 and TLD. I would take a middling FYEO-level film and at least see the series making some sort of progress and finding its feet outside of the Broccoli control.

    The about-turn on BB/MGW leaving being a creative loss is also a bit of an odd reaction given a lot of peoples general thoughts towards them over the years.

    Since they got control on their own from GoldenEye, the Rotten Tomatoes average user score is 67%. I know RT is far from the bar for which real quality is measured for individual movies, but it's not a terrible metric to judge them on either as an overall score, and they have as many hits as misses - GoldenEye and CR are by far my two favourite Bond films. DAD and NTTD are by far my most disliked. All 4 made under BB/MGW. My point being that whoever comes in after them doesn't have an unblemished record to live up to from a creative point of view that seems to have been implied by some - and I would argue that people worried about Bond losing its soul, etc, take a look at the entire DC era. That's not me taking a dump on it, but just referencing the fact that tonal, stylistic and creative change has happened, has been drastic, and is not new to the series. Will style change again from Bond 26? Probably. Just like it did with every new Bond actor I suppose.

    Obviously, if Amazon decide to treat it as the one-size-fits-all cash cow with TV shows and spin-offs appearing every 6 weeks, then my opinion would surely change, but as we stand we have no sign of that, so no reason to be to down just yet. Also, I think Disney's backlash with Star Wars (and a slightly lesser extent with the MCU) has been a fair warning to anyone else taking on huge cinematic IP's, so the talk of Bond becoming the next Disney Star Wars might be a tad pessimistic.

    Also, Bond is not Star Wars. As much as I prefer the Tux'd Super Spy over the Sword Fighting Monks of Far Far Away, realistically we all know Star Wars appeal is wider reaching and all encompassing. Spy movies, Bond or otherwise, have not ever reached that level, so I doubt the avenues to exploit it as such would be seen as financially viable. Also, EoN were hardly saints when it comes to be tat-merchants with the Bond licence... after all, they put the Bond name on Die Another Day and kept a straight face ;) ;)

  • edited February 20 Posts: 3,335
    I’m fairly optimistic about this news. The last Bond film I was truly happy with was CR, and NTTD was a real low point for me, so I wasn’t happy with the series as it was. The fact that we have had no movies since then proves her heart wasn’t in it anymore. It was only a matter of time before this happened. It’s just a shame it’s taken her so long to reach this decision, as we could have had a new film by now.

    As long as Amazon do the smart thing and hand over creative control to someone like Nolan, then we could be on to a real winner with the next film. The fear is they will turn it into another Marvel or Disney franchise, which I really hope doesn’t happen.

    I actually feel like celebrating this news overall. At least we are now guaranteed another Bond film. Onwards and upwards 007!!

  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    edited February 20 Posts: 575
    Why are they selling the creative rights but still holding on to their share? Why not sell everything? In the 007.com article it mentions they will remain co-owners but whats the point?
  • Posts: 4,628
    Why are they selling the creative rights but still holding on to their share? Why not sell everything? In the 007.com article it mentions they will remain co-owners but whats the point?

    Why on earth would they sell those shares if they have them? It's worth a lot of money and gives them some leverage.
  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 575
    007HallY wrote: »
    Why are they selling the creative rights but still holding on to their share? Why not sell everything? In the 007.com article it mentions they will remain co-owners but whats the point?

    Why on earth would they sell those shares if they have them? It's worth a lot of money and gives them some leverage.

    What leverage?
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,599
    I'm torn by the news. If only I hadn't witnessed what Amazon did with LOTR. I might have more hope that they would stick to the legacy of the character and the series. I am rather concerned that the emphasis might more on content then on quality. I also see the end of practical effects, though I hope I am wrong on that front.

    The proof of where this is going will be in the announcement of a director. Interesting to see if Purvis and Wade stick around to provide continuity or whether we see all new faces come on board.

    On the positive side I doubt we will be waiting 5 years between films! LOL!
  • edited February 20 Posts: 2,191
    Why are they selling the creative rights but still holding on to their share? Why not sell everything? In the 007.com article it mentions they will remain co-owners but whats the point?

    Picking up the residuals cheque every three months. Theyve both got a lifestyle to pay for.
  • SeanoSeano Minnesota. No, it's not always cold.
    Posts: 46
    I tend to think the pessimistic view of things is more likely over the long run.

    On the other hand, I'm actually somewhat more hopeful for the next new film, because Amazon is highly incentivized to make it something special. If Bond 26 is just a routine streaming-level clunker, all the headlines are going to be about how Amazon killed Bond, which will most certainly be bad for business. Amazon needs Bond as a successful movie property for now, because unlike Marvel or Star Wars or DC, there's currently no comparable other revenue stream to fall back on to earn money off of the IP.
  • edited February 20 Posts: 4,628
    007HallY wrote: »
    Why are they selling the creative rights but still holding on to their share? Why not sell everything? In the 007.com article it mentions they will remain co-owners but whats the point?

    Why on earth would they sell those shares if they have them? It's worth a lot of money and gives them some leverage.

    What leverage?

    If you own a certain amount of a property and are making a deal, that'll give you some leverage (certain clauses or demands etc). Dependent on the nature of the deal the series could even go back to EON (in theory, although we really don't know the ins and outs as of yet). Even if they don't want to have anything to do with the series or can't, the financial gain's a big aspect for the company. It wouldn't be worth selling the share.
Sign In or Register to comment.