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
- the tweets from MI6-HQ seem to be suggesting what may be on the table is the U.S. rights that MGM still holds. Which....I cannot see Apple/Netflix/Amazon bidding so much for because for a film like this, these platforms will want it available globally. Only way at the moment a US-only sale happens is if HBO Max or Hulu (or Peacock though I bet that's unlikely due to their 'free' ad-supported nature) take it.
-
- If it goes with either of the above 3, a cinema release will 90% still happen. Just won't be for the traditional 90 days/16 weeks, which means the major chains will refuse to play it and most IMAXes won't as a result (except independently run venies). Partly that's because that's something they already do with their biggest prestige titles, quite widely 2-3 weeks before online drops - but also no doubt EON will insist on a theatrical element if an SVOD deal goes through. Playing/played in cinemas recently - Trial of the Chicago 7, Rebecca, On The Rocks, Mank is in a couple of weeks, Borat...
I would be heartbroken to think that I'd have to watch the new Bond film on my laptop using a HDMI cable to hook it up to my janky TV. Opposed to the IMAX at Waterloo in London. But, alas, this looks like a very real prospect.
However, reading some comments online, I do think there is a public and business benefit to this decision:
But, as things stand today, MGM and Barbara allegedly don't want to sell. Plus, it would be the ultimate betrayal of theatres who have supported Bond and helped turned it into the international brand it is today. That part hurts the most......It's the reason why the Ankler (a respected industry insider paper - the same folk who stated that Greyhound was going to Apple amongst other scoops) saying that Barbara has said the film is 'not for sale' (see below quote and credit to @antovolk who uploaded it to Twitter). Barbara's alleged comments mirrors MGM's statement to Bloomberg. In his piece, Drew McWeeny is exclusive viewing this from MGM's perspective.
I do think there is a very big caveat to these statements. They may not be considering it today and it may not be on sale today. But this is an evolving situation and it could be very different in the new years.
Basically the quicker you get a vaccine, the quicker the markets improve. Things will get worse leading to Xmas and the vaccine won't be a silver bullet. But it'll improve public confidence and the worlds' markets. I don't think any drug company wants to release phase 3 data (despite Oxford and Pfizer said to be ready) until after the American election out of fear of politicisation.
It looks as though MGM are looking into selling with a price tag of $600m. Apparently, the figure was deemed 'too rich' for Netflix and Apple. Also, Variety are unsure how the Broccoli's figure in these talks and how much say they have. Since they own the franchise with MGM, I'd imagine they have a rather large say.
There is the interesting wrinkle from the WSJ story (though I can't access it behind the paywall!) that NTTD could be used by MGM Chair, Kevin Ulrich as leverage to sell MGM to Apple or Comcast.
Thinking about this from a business perspective, there is a chance that these talks for NTTD may be MGM's way to accelerate those acquisition talks. I could be wrong. But that's how I see it......
I'm so curious to hear what Barbara actually thinks of all this.
I think it was all borne out of Drew McWeeny's tweets and then Bloomberg following up with a short write-up. Variety just took the baton and can now claim to be 'first' by adding some meat to the bones of the rumour.
I do imagine that these talks have been happening a lot with franchise films over the pandemic. But this has a microscope on it because of the rumour-spreading on Twitter.
If I was Barbara, I'd be keen now to get my opinion out there. There is always the concern that you would be throwing fuel on the fire. But I could see a Deadline article with an 'anonymous source' quoting Barbara's opinion (I think we all know that some of these 'leaks' come from people very high up). Alternatively, it could be quite wild if Eon actually put out an Instagram or Twitter post to dispel the rumours.
They did when the tabloids reported on Craig's ankle injury and Pinewood explosion. Both were 'rumours' they commented on.
I really need help with accepting a streaming release....It's currently breaking my heart.
(Maybe Barbara saw my post above? Lol)
Looks like I guessed correctly, that MGM only had cursory talks and the story leaked out because of McWeeny's tweet. This doesn't look like a story out of the ordinary as Top Gun 2 and others have supposedly had similar talks. This just caught more interest.
Interesting they also note that Barbara was blindsided by these talks! That's wild! There have been rumours of bad blood at MGM and Eon for years. I don't think these moves came from Michael De Luca (who seemingly has a good relationship with Eon) but from Kevin Ulrich.
Nevertheless, the last few paragraphs are worrying. Basically saying that April 2021 probably won't happen and if things are still bad next summer, then Bond going to streaming is more of a reality.
😞😞😞😞😞😞
Any delay from there adds to a perfect storm for delay to the 60th anniversary year 2022. To recreate the success enjoyed by Skyfall, that alignment and promotion has a lot of benefits.
I'll take whatever comes.
We know that things are looking positive for a vaccine by the end of November. I'd say stick with April 2021 come hell or high water. Considering public confidence would improve going into the spring, NTTD could play into the summer months. If I was Eon, I would sit tight.
[url="http://"]A few interesting changes occurred in the Deadline article overnight[/url]. Namely:
Interesting changes...Especially, the latter two. I can only imagine that MGM or Broccoli were not happy and asked for some amendments to the article.
If this does happen, then Netflix would be ideal as I have a subscription. But I think Apple are the ones to keep an eye on. Just find it a bit gross that they have the word 'TV' in their name. I don't like that at all. Just call it Apple+. It's neater
No, I agree with you.
However, I do believe that the quicker we get an approved vaccine (which given the UK not having to deal with the EU procedure process could see the Oxford vaccine approved by the end of November), then once this happen the quicker the markets improve.
Undeniably, with or without a vaccine things will get worse leading to Xmas. In this respect, the vaccine will not be a silver bullet. Things will not improve overnight. But approval will improve public confidence and the worlds' markets. which is what Hollywood needs. It needs studios to put out big movies and for audiences to feel more confident to venture out. Safety procedures in theatres is only part of the equation in this respect.
So, we are in a bit of a holding pattern till we get vaccine news. I don't think any drug company wants to release phase 3 data (despite Oxford and Pfizer said to be ready) until after the American election out of fear of politicisation.
I was just about to post this, a good breakdown.
New info in the above.
Essentially, Apple offered $400m. However, the producers are holding out for $600m. No mention of MGM's perspective or opinion. (This is seemingly one of the first articles not to mention some kind of power struggle between Eon and MGM)
However, even $400m is nothing to sniff at during a pandemic. Currently the only comparator is Tenet which has made $341.5m in just over 2 months. That film probably won't be able to make it to $400m or get to $100m domestically.
If Deadline are right and streaming was explored in September before the last release date change, then I suppose the decision made by Eon/MGM was to wait and see if theatres were safe in spring 2021.
I'm curious though could Apple make a deal to support MGM in distributing NTTD domestically? Whether that would lead to something like the usual theatrical window but then the film is an exclusive Apple streaming title for year after those 3 months? That's the best of all world's - Bond stays in cinemas and MGM get some financial help during their hour of need. Is that how you see it @antovolk - is that feasible? MGM going it alone with domestic was always a risk.
I doubt MGM and EON would want such a deal, especially as the reprtts seem to suggest that the NTTD talks are said to be for a one-year window, so after a year MGM and Universal can still release physical media, do the onward ancillary sales on TV and so forth.
And neither would Apple in all honesty, there's no incentive for them if the traditional theatrical window isn't shortened (again, people seem to think if this goes to Apple it won't have a theatrical presence, it will...and may be, like Irishman tried to be, a real test in negotiations between the big chains and the streamers and other distributors about the window. Missing out on Bond just because it's exclusively in cinemas for 3 weeks instead of 16?) or they don't get the downstream rights.
I was thinking about Killers of the Flower Moon as the paradigm case.
Is there no way that Apple would make the deal for domestic theatrical but included in that would be a deal not only for streaming but also VOD/home media? Therefore, once the film is done with its theatrical window in the USA, Apple get a slice of the home entertainment sales before it becomes an ATV+ exclusive? They'd also get a deal for the existing Bond films that MGM can licence out in the USA.
Effectively making this NTTD deal a sweetener for an eventual MGM/Apple acquisition. Which, if it was to happen, wouldn't mean a death to MGM films in theatres. I mean, Apple won't force Ridley Scott or PTA into streaming. Plus, Apple have a precedent with theatres. On the Rocks had a theatrical run, and I understand it would have been bigger if the pandemic had subsided by now.
That's a good deal. Because MGM get paid and Apple get a big win - both in content library and a big theatrical release. Pus, Apple wouldn't get worldwide, they would only be in it for the domestic release. So those big numbers like $600m wouldn't be on the table anymore. It would be more reasonable
The concession would be that they don't get the "exciting, new" Bond film exclusively on their service. Which, alas, I feel is the ultimate goal for Apple.
It would be crushing not to see NTTD in IMAX.
I doubt it re: the above, there's simply no precedent. Of course, Apple acquiring MGM would change that somewhat, they have reason to not just acquire stuff for ATV+ but also monetise wider through VOD and physical home ent. But at the moment it's all about ATV+ for them.
I still find it hard to believe Apple or Amazon or Netflix would consider just the U.S. rights for this. Apple is the most likely of the three to, but these platforms due to their global presence will want the world. The only ones that can get away with U.S. only are HBO Max and Hulu due to their lack of international presence.
It may sound a bit too much like being taken from a plot of a movie but can they get the rights for U.S. and basically bully Universal to sell them international rights by telling them that they have to sell them the rights or they will put the movie out in the US on streaming therefore lowering the value by allowing the movie to be pirated for international audience in a good quality. So Universal would have to either sell or put the movie out and take a massive loss
This sounds like a big legal no-no.
I don't think they'd go about it like that but that's basically what the MI6-HQ guys are suspecting. Universal may be forced to make a similar pivot if a US sale goes through due to piracy concerns... But if Universal goes out with the international release early enough (say 3 weeks before U.S., then the U.S. gets 3 further weeks theatrically via Apple/Netflix before going on streaming there) then Universal can get away with keeping it a traditional release, and maybe see if after 6 weeks total the international chains would be okay with PVOD?
I don't think Apple would be so shady.
The Variety article says any potential deal would be for worldwide and Universal would have to be made "good." Which I suspect means they either get looped into the deal or they get paid off. I suspect that whoever came up with that $600m number factored that in.
I think that MGM clearly don't have the means to distribute the film. So why don't they just make a deal with Universal for domestic? Or make a deal for Apple to help with domestic? I'm sure Apple would jump with glee to assist MGM with the domestic launch of NTTD. In fact, Apple are planning to release the next Will Smith film, 'Emancipation' in theatres before it goes to ATV+. Plus, I think the domestic right would probably be no more than $100-150m. That's money MGM could use right now.
I'm sure a similar deal could be factored for NTTD. Though we don't know what Universal's tolerance is with NTTD currently. They may want it off the books, especially if Apple can buy them back whatever they have already contributed. That may be their best bet during the pandemic.
I do think that if Apple get the rights, then I wouldn't necessarily write off NTTD getting a full theatrical run (whatever shape that takes post-pandemic). It would be worth Apple being involved just to see the glorious 'Apple Original Film' logo before a 007 flick. If this is the circumstances upon which Bond goes 'streaming', I could live with it. But I need a theatrical run first!
However......Surely Eon are aware of the bad blood they are brewing by possibly going down this streaming path. The British press were after their necks follows the NTTD/Cineworld debacle less than a month ago. In fact, the think-pieces in the broadsheets has already shaking their head in dismay Bond going streaming. (Anyone out there able to access the article?)
Proabably because Bond is the longest active franchise in the history of cinema, lasting nearly 60 years. You can ask your grandpa about the first Bond film he saw when he was a young boy, but you can't ask him the same about the FAST & FURIOUS films.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2020/10/26/sending-no-time-to-die-to-streaming-would-kill-the-james-bond-movies/#102c21056ab1
“Mulan was a big deal precisely because it was intended as a major theatrical release. Remove that distinction, and it’s Lady and the Tramp. If No Time to Die skips theaters, could MGM convince audiences James Bond 26 was a theater-worthy event? If not, that would curtail the franchise’s value in terms of streaming acquisitions and promotional tie-ins. If Marvel movies suddenly stopped being “theater worthy,” Disney could still produce them as loss leaders to drive Disney+ subscriptions. MGM and EON don’t have that luxury.”
In all seriousness though, the Bond team won't let the franchise go to streaming until it's 100% the last possible option. I'm surprised they'd even let it go for $600m.