SPECTRE Production Timeline

11415171920870

Comments

  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    http://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=10919&t=mi6&s=news

    Here's the story. Intresting how Ben says that he "don't really know anymore"
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 6,601
    Its all up to how fast they find their director. No more, no less. As usual, its complicated with getting the film to thze starting line. What is it with Bond? . Shame... :(
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited May 2013 Posts: 13,356
    So it seems 2014 was the plan but now with no director found, it'll be another three year wait? Good God, this is pathetic. EON, please let me still have faith in you.

    And it was Ben at the BAFTAs. Good to know.
  • Posts: 9,858
    I just don't get why it's hard to find a good director.
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 6,601
    Risico007 wrote:
    I just don't get why it's hard to find a good director.

    Because they are all loody scared.
    But if really 14 won't happen, a summer 15 should be manageable and IMO, they WILL go for it. Like this, we are still in good shape.

  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    Summer 2015 will be packed with large films, so the question is if EoN want's to go up against Star Wars and Avengers 2. To name a few.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    And as has already been mentioned, all the 2014 dates have been taken, so unless they want to compete, you'd have thought a release date would have been set by now.

    If it is 2015 then the least we should expect is 2017 for the one after.
  • Posts: 9,858
    I just don't get why they cant find a director I would even accept Ang Lee at this point...

    (re-watches The Hulk)


    On second thought if they need to wait to find a good director that is fine
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    I don't want to really settle or accept anyone. Like I've said, I would much rather wait another year or two and have a bigger break between films if it guaranteed more work, time, and effort was put into 'Bond 24,' as opposed to rushing one out (ala QoS) in hopes of cashing in on SF's success.
  • Posts: 1,407
    March or April 2015 would make total sense for EON. Big films are doing very well in those months. Just as well as a November release would. I think if they do miss 2014, then they should really try the new March/April market if they didn't want to release in the "big" summer months
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,359
    After Green Lantern pretty much flopped, EoN should contact Martin Campbell to do another one. He's already directed two of the best James Bond movies of all time. I'm sure he can bring in another big hit.
  • Posts: 4,412
    Germanlady wrote:
    Why would JW be right? First of all, he has hardly done any movie work and if, not at all anything to do with action.

    You just described Sam Mendes and we all know how that worked out.
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    Based on a Barbara Broccoli and Daniel Craig interview some months back, it seems that 2015 was always their preferred date. Broccoli mentioned that she regretted allowing the studios to pressure them for a faster turnaround in the past (I imagine she was referring to TND and QoS, in particular - both rushed into the production off the back of a big hit.)

    And a longer gap between films seems to yield better results. GE, CR and SF have been the three most successful films, critically and commercially of the modern era and all benefitted from a longer-than-usual gap.

    Not sure how I feel about Wright. Atonement was very good but he isn't in the same league as Mendes (still crossing my fingers for Alfonso Cuaron!)
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    2015 would mean three years between films really is becoming the norm. How sad.
  • Posts: 1,407
    Samuel001 wrote:
    2015 would mean three years between films really is becoming the norm. How sad.

    I'm sure some original fans said the same of the two year gap. Doesn't make it any less frustrating though
  • bondbat007 wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    2015 would mean three years between films really is becoming the norm. How sad.

    I'm sure some original fans said the same of the two year gap. Doesn't make it any less frustrating though

    Agreed with both sets of comments. Filmmaking is just a more complicated, more expensive and more time-consuming business these days. And 3 years is about the standard time it seems to take between sequels for the major franchises now (except for those that are filmed back-to-back like Lord of the Rings or on a more-or-less permanent cycle like The Hobbit.)

    The development takes longer now too as there are no more original stories to base the films on (unless Danjaq try to acquire the continuation novels which I'm sure they won't).
  • Posts: 9,858
    ok the "they have to write original stories so it takes longer" is not a valid argument as they have done it before with original stories.

    They need a strong Director and Writer team willing to be on a few films in order for Bond to every other year again.
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    Risico007 wrote:
    ok the "they have to write original stories so it takes longer" is not a valid argument as they have done it before with original stories.
    It's a perfectly valid argument.

    The first two-year gap between Bond films was 1965 - 1967. You Only Live Twice was the first Bond film with a story that significantly departed from Fleming. This isn't just a coincidence.

    The first three-year gap between films was 1974 - 1977. The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) was the first wholly original story for a Bond film. This, too, isn't a coincidence.

    As far back as the early 1980s (FYEO if I recall,) John Glen was complaining that the two-year schedule was becoming harder and harder to stick to and leading to increasingly rushed pre-production periods. Glen's successors, Roger Spottiswoode, Michael Apted and Marc Forster have all made the same complaint. Martin Campbell, Lee Tamahori and Sam Mendes haven't (GE, DAD and SF, of course, had longer development periods.) This, again, is not just a coincidence.

    Look at the major recent film series which have largely original stories: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Star Trek, Star Wars, Pirates of the Caribbean, Mission: Impossible, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America. All have roughly 3 years between instalments. You'll have probably already guessed that I don't chalk this up to just coincidence.

    The exceptions are (a) Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Twilight, The Hunger Games - all faithful adaptations of novels* or; (b) B Movie fare series like Saw or The Fast and the Furious.

    Development takes a long time. Anyone in the film business will tell you that it's the part of the process that takes the longest. Particularly if you want to get it right.
    Risico007 wrote:
    They need a strong Director and Writer team willing to be on a few films in order for Bond to every other year again.

    I'd like to see this too for a number of reasons but I don't think it will necessarily help shorten the gaps between films as you imagine. Many of those examples posted above, after all, have had this too.

    I agree with @Samuel001 that it's a shame not to have a new film to look forward to every two years but we just have to accept it and take it on the chin. I think it will lead to better films.


    *Even then, they have to work to a pretty-much year-round production schedule. That's okay if you're making a finite amount of films but not if you're planning to go on forever
  • The only problem with a three year wait is that it doesn't guarantee results. TWINE-DAD is a three year wait and that hot mess is the worst film out of the 23. I think it's unfair to compare that to CR-QOS where we had a writer's strike as well as a director who thought he could reinvent the franchise.

    There's nothing we can do if new films are going to be every 3 years except to accept it. And so I will. But I think they could still do one every 2 and be successful, it just sounds like neither Barb nor Mike have their Dad's energy and drive.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    I don't know what the hell Babs and MGW are doing. Logan should be near to completing a script and finding a proper director shouldn't take six months. They can start shooting early 2014, then release the film in November 2014. Easy!
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    I don't know what the hell Babs and MGW are doing. Logan should be near to completing a script and finding a proper director shouldn't take six months. They can start shooting early 2014, then release the film in November 2014. Easy!
    Seriously, this sort of attitude, @Aziz_Fekkesh, is why I sometimes despair of Fandom.
    The only problem with a three year wait is that it doesn't guarantee results. TWINE-DAD is a three year wait and that hot mess is the worst film out of the 23. I think it's unfair to compare that to CR-QOS where we had a writer's strike as well as a director who thought he could reinvent the franchise.
    Well, I don't think you can ever guarantee results but you can improve your odds. It's a very fair point about the writers strike (also a problem for LTK) and I'd agree with you about DAD which is bottom of my list too. But GE, CR and SF are the three other films that benefitted from prolonged development periods and I don't think I'm unusual in rating them amongst the very best of the modern films.

    And as the two-year turnaround has been a complaint from every single director who's had to face it since 1981, I think there's probably something in it.
    There's nothing we can do if new films are going to be every 3 years except to accept it. And so I will. But I think they could still do one every 2 and be successful, it just sounds like neither Barb nor Mike have their Dad's energy and drive.
    Well, Cubby was an incredible man. But I think criticism about the energy and drive of his successors is pretty harsh. On Wilson, especially. He's produced 10 massively successful films in 27 years. Most producers would kill for a record like that. On top of that, he exec'd three films beforehand, wrote all 5 of the 80s films, developed the James Bond Jnr cartoon, expanded Bond into the video game market, and fought a huge legal case against Sony and McClory in his capacity as Chairman of Danjaq. And he's just produced the most successful Bond film of all time. He's 71 years old. Maybe Cubby would win out in the energy and drive stakes. But you certainly can't accuse the man of being lazy.
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 3,236
    I don't know what the hell Babs and MGW are doing. Logan should be near to completing a script and finding a proper director shouldn't take six months. They can start shooting early 2014, then release the film in November 2014. Easy!
    Seriously, this sort of attitude, @Aziz_Fekkesh, is why I sometimes despair of Fandom.

    We have it easy. Coming from Star Wars and Metallica and pro wrestling fandoms (and being a Catholic) I was amazed how people here were so positive about Bond. It's like we actually like the thing we're supposedly fans of.

    EDIT: Forgot a word
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    I don't know what the hell Babs and MGW are doing. Logan should be near to completing a script and finding a proper director shouldn't take six months. They can start shooting early 2014, then release the film in November 2014. Easy!
    Seriously, this sort of attitude, @Aziz_Fekkesh, is why I sometimes despair of Fandom.

    We have it easy. Coming from Star Wars and Metallica and pro wrestling fandoms (and being a Catholic) I was amazed how people here were so positive about. It's like we actually like the thing we're supposedly fans of.

    Ha! You're right, of course @Soundofthesinners. I visited a Dr Who forum once and the fans posting there successfully convinced me Dr Who isn't very good! I've stopped watching it.
  • In the last issue, Total Film writes that Bond 24 is scheduled for 2016.
  • In the last issue, Total Film writes that Bond 24 is scheduled for 2016.

    Do they give any further details, @Suivez_ce_parachute, or do you think that is based on the MGM statement. I have to say that I'm with @Samuel001 and expect to see it in 2015.
  • Still desperately holding out hope for late 2014, although early 2015 won't be bad. Summer 2015 risks Licence to Kill Rd. 2 as there's Avengers 2, Star Wars, and probably some other blockbusters. Late 2015 makes me sad.

  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    Still desperately holding out hope for late 2014, although early 2015 won't be bad. Summer 2015 risks Licence to Kill Rd. 2 as there's Avengers 2, Star Wars, and probably some other blockbusters. Late 2015 makes me sad.

    I'd be surprised to see it early in the year as that's generally a no-go area for big blockbusters. I think Summer could actually work but LTK spooked MGM / Eon so much that they're still wary of it. Autumn just feels like it's the "Bond slot" now. GE was the first Bond film I ever saw at the cinema - a November release is all I've ever known. But it seems to work well.

    It is a long wait though!
  • Still desperately holding out hope for late 2014, although early 2015 won't be bad. Summer 2015 risks Licence to Kill Rd. 2 as there's Avengers 2, Star Wars, and probably some other blockbusters. Late 2015 makes me sad.

    I'd be surprised to see it early in the year as that's generally a no-go area for big blockbusters. I think Summer could actually work but LTK spooked MGM / Eon so much that they're still wary of it. Autumn just feels like it's the "Bond slot" now. GE was the first Bond film I ever saw at the cinema - a November release is all I've ever known. But it seems to work well.

    It is a long wait though!

    But if they think they can have it ready by early 2015, I see no reason to delay for 6+ months. Get them films out, EON!

  • Still desperately holding out hope for late 2014, although early 2015 won't be bad. Summer 2015 risks Licence to Kill Rd. 2 as there's Avengers 2, Star Wars, and probably some other blockbusters. Late 2015 makes me sad.

    I'd be surprised to see it early in the year as that's generally a no-go area for big blockbusters. I think Summer could actually work but LTK spooked MGM / Eon so much that they're still wary of it. Autumn just feels like it's the "Bond slot" now. GE was the first Bond film I ever saw at the cinema - a November release is all I've ever known. But it seems to work well.

    It is a long wait though!

    But if they think they can have it ready by early 2015, I see no reason to delay for 6+ months. Get them films out, EON!

    Agreed! Although the distributor will ultimately decide when it's released so it's out of Eon's hands in that respect. Not sure how that will work between MGM and their co-distributor. Has Sony/Columbia signed up for Bond 24 yet? And does anyone know when the distribution agreement with MGM runs out?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,356
    Sony/Columbia are on board until Bond 25.

    If it is 2015 what was all this, we'll "announce a director soon" from MGM about? I haven't lost all hope for next year just yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.