Where does Bond go after Craig?

1366367369371372682

Comments

  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 686
    I'm starting to believe all these rumors that Nolan is in talks for 2 Bond films, and they're being held up because he wants to make them period films... All I have to say is, "Please let Nolan make faithful adaptions of the Blofeld Trilogy! OHMSS doesn't need it, but YOLT desperately does!"

    I don't think TB needs readapting either, and any adaptation of YOLT would need an overhaul to work for the screen, especially considering elements of it were used only recently.
  • Posts: 1,369
    ATJ's facial features screams Bond 7. If it isn't him, I would be very surprised to be honest.

    I don't like his voice.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Actors are still on strike. More meetings are booked for Friday and into next week....
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 6,709
    And the news from the 007 website are about an oddjob hat prop replica. Someone made a joke about that possibility. There’s a Futurologist amongst us ;) So, no real news about Bond 26. Because, as @peter has said countless times, there can’t be any.

    Oh well, another year as a Bond fan.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 579
    Univex wrote: »
    there can’t be any.

    That was true before the WGA strike was over. They don't need to wait for the end of the SAG strike to hire a writer and a director, and to start writing the script.
  • Posts: 6,709
    Univex wrote: »
    there can’t be any.

    That was true before the WGA strike was over. They don't need to wait for the end of the SAG strike to hire a writer and a director, and to start writing the script.

    Quite right. Oh well, it’s early. Maybe we’ll still get some sort of news.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    As some from here saw, I received a text to not really expect anything today; if anything, it was mentioned Road to a Million, but the producers have supposedly also taken an active role in the video game development.

    (Unfortunately two things I’m not really interested in).

    Further chats with this person really did wave me off of any expectations re: B26 (“they’re not quite there yet”, which isn’t surprising at all; strike just ended, the Nolan rumours were seemingly just that).
  • Dear EON, please give Nolan freedom please to make his Bond film
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Dear EON, please give Nolan freedom please to make his Bond film

    I’m sure they’ll be discussions, but if there’s not a fit, there’s not a fit.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    peter wrote: »
    Dear EON, please give Nolan freedom please to make his Bond film

    I’m sure they’ll be discussions, but if there’s not a fit, there’s not a fit.

    Exactly. Apparently , years ago, Nolan pitched his vision for Bond to EON; I doubt if the core of that idea has changed. If this is true then a sticking point may be period piece or contemporary setting. If neither side budges then no Nolan. Of course all of this is pure speculation.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 4,167
    talos7 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Dear EON, please give Nolan freedom please to make his Bond film

    I’m sure they’ll be discussions, but if there’s not a fit, there’s not a fit.

    Exactly. Apparently , years ago, Nolan pitched his vision for Bond to EON; I doubt if the core of that idea has changed. If this is true then a sticking point may be period piece or contemporary setting. If neither side budges then no Nolan. Of course all of this is pure speculation.

    Is that true? I thought he was only approached to direct.

    Anyway, I’ll reiterate again, even directors who get a large amount of freedom on these big projects (think someone like Matt Reeves with The Batman) have to first grasp a) what the producers or studios want and b) outline what they want to do or convince them of their approach. There’s not going to be a situation where Nolan, or indeed any director, will get hired, given a budget and told ‘off you go, do whatever you want’ and churn out a script ready to be filmed. That would be insane. Not even Nolan had that situation with his Batman films.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,425
    Yes, Broccoli and Wilson curate this series, and you don't respect Cubby's legacy by just letting people go off and do whatever they like with it.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    The SAG strike affects the US only does it not?
    British Actor may not be affected, as Equity to my knowledge has not come out in sympathy. Which means as long as the production is UK based (which it likely is anyway) the strike wouldn’t affect it in any way. There’s been no effect on Doctor Who for a start, even with the Disney money under it.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 579
    007HallY wrote: »
    There’s not going to be a situation where Nolan, or indeed any director, will get hired, given a budget and told ‘off you go, do whatever you want’ and churn out a script ready to be filmed.

    Sure, but there could be a situation where Nolan is given a lot of creative freedom (more than any Bond director before, including Sam Mendes), including final cut privilege, after EON has okayed his screenplay. And I don't see Nolan agreeing to directing without being given final cut privilege.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,425
    JustJames wrote: »
    The SAG strike affects the US only does it not?
    British Actor may not be affected, as Equity to my knowledge has not come out in sympathy. Which means as long as the production is UK based (which it likely is anyway) the strike wouldn’t affect it in any way. There’s been no effect on Doctor Who for a start, even with the Disney money under it.

    They are American studio movies though, and any lead actor is most certainly going to be a SAG member, so I don't think they'd be going anywhere near a Hollywood movie.

    Funnily enough, Roger's old SAG cards are on show/sale in London at the moment:

    F7izAwrXcAA2gqs?format=jpg&name=small
  • Posts: 4,167
    007HallY wrote: »
    There’s not going to be a situation where Nolan, or indeed any director, will get hired, given a budget and told ‘off you go, do whatever you want’ and churn out a script ready to be filmed.

    Sure, but there could be a situation where Nolan is given a lot of creative freedom (more than any Bond director before, including Sam Mendes), including final cut privilege, after EON has okayed his screenplay. And I don't see Nolan agreeing to directing without being given final cut privilege.

    Possibly. But like @peter said if it’s a case where EON don’t see Nolan as the right fit then they won’t go with him. Same with any other director. And as has been said in the past BB and MGW are very hands on, creatively involved producers.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    edited October 2023 Posts: 216
    mtm wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    The SAG strike affects the US only does it not?
    British Actor may not be affected, as Equity to my knowledge has not come out in sympathy. Which means as long as the production is UK based (which it likely is anyway) the strike wouldn’t affect it in any way. There’s been no effect on Doctor Who for a start, even with the Disney money under it.

    They are American studio movies though, and any lead actor is most certainly going to be a SAG member, so I don't think they'd be going anywhere near a Hollywood movie.

    Funnily enough, Roger's old SAG cards are on show/sale in London at the moment:

    F7izAwrXcAA2gqs?format=jpg&name=small

    Those are interesting. Wasn’t Rog an expat in Switzerland after a certain point?
    Vis a vis EON, I always got the impression they are borderline ‘independent’ in relation to Hollywood, the last of the big ones, and had been based in Britain (not least for tax purposes) basically forever. The problem of course is the old Broccoli/Salzman share situation and its hangover — MGM of course is Hollywood (and UA was… literally formed out of a desire to be independent of the Hollywood studio system) but EON as such *may not be*.
    It’s certainly true that actors who, like Moore, may be members of SAG, are still acting *but not in US productions* and aren’t scabbing by doing so. Many also refuse to promote projects in America (like the Who people not doing Comicon and similar as a show of solidarity) for related reasons.

    Basically, I strongly suspect that *if* screen tests were shot in London, by a British team and Actor, for a film to be shot in British studios and non-US locations, it would not be breaking the strike. How far down the line that would have to progress — and whether the money behind it is a factor, would be up in the air. (Amazon money funds The Grand Tour, and it is at least *in part* scripted, and yet Clarkson, Hammond and May have been shooting in Africa these last few weeks. I do not know whether they would be officially classed as ‘actors’ but likely are, including for Union purposes — not least as they have cameoed in productions, including as characters, in US productions.)

    The writers strike was more of a problem for some reason, but that might be down to who pays the cheques, and where the writers are based. Also to do with the nature of the guilds and unions involved I imagine.

    (Edit: Eon is British. In fact, given the location of their office, I am increasingly convinced I know who sold Barbara Broccoli that David Arnold CD ‘shaken and stirred’. I might in fact know them very very well indeed.)
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,425
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Good point, that makes it nice and simple.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.

    I don’t think (nor do I support) anyone crossing the picket lines, as I say, I am just wondering how that would apply in this case to EON.
    As you say, MgM/Amazon is now de facto financier — no extra deals with Sony and whathaveyou — so that would be a factor.
    But by the same token, SAG is US only isn’t it? There are still British productions ongoing.

    I am not saying they *should* be edging the game slightly by doing screentests, but I am wondering if they legally *could* basically. And also wondering where that ends… I cannot see them going too far into casting or shooting, even with their production being Brit based.
  • Posts: 564
    JustJames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.

    I don’t think (nor do I support) anyone crossing the picket lines, as I say, I am just wondering how that would apply in this case to EON.
    As you say, MgM/Amazon is now de facto financier — no extra deals with Sony and whathaveyou — so that would be a factor.
    But by the same token, SAG is US only isn’t it? There are still British productions ongoing.

    I am not saying they *should* be edging the game slightly by doing screentests, but I am wondering if they legally *could* basically. And also wondering where that ends… I cannot see them going too far into casting or shooting, even with their production being Brit based.


    It's not "de facto" financier. It's the exact opposite of "de facto". It is an MGM production, and MGM is one of the struck companies. Any actor working on it would be a scab.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    BMB007 wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.

    I don’t think (nor do I support) anyone crossing the picket lines, as I say, I am just wondering how that would apply in this case to EON.
    As you say, MgM/Amazon is now de facto financier — no extra deals with Sony and whathaveyou — so that would be a factor.
    But by the same token, SAG is US only isn’t it? There are still British productions ongoing.

    I am not saying they *should* be edging the game slightly by doing screentests, but I am wondering if they legally *could* basically. And also wondering where that ends… I cannot see them going too far into casting or shooting, even with their production being Brit based.


    It's not "de facto" financier. It's the exact opposite of "de facto". It is an MGM production, and MGM is one of the struck companies. Any actor working on it would be a scab.

    De facto means ‘in fact’. In this case, because what is being said shows that it doesn’t matter if Eon is the one in basic control, it comes down to the MGM business.
  • Posts: 564
    JustJames wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.

    I don’t think (nor do I support) anyone crossing the picket lines, as I say, I am just wondering how that would apply in this case to EON.
    As you say, MgM/Amazon is now de facto financier — no extra deals with Sony and whathaveyou — so that would be a factor.
    But by the same token, SAG is US only isn’t it? There are still British productions ongoing.

    I am not saying they *should* be edging the game slightly by doing screentests, but I am wondering if they legally *could* basically. And also wondering where that ends… I cannot see them going too far into casting or shooting, even with their production being Brit based.


    It's not "de facto" financier. It's the exact opposite of "de facto". It is an MGM production, and MGM is one of the struck companies. Any actor working on it would be a scab.

    De facto means ‘in fact’. In this case, because what is being said shows that it doesn’t matter if Eon is the one in basic control, it comes down to the MGM business.

    "De facto" implies it exists absent any legal authority. Southern states de facto banned Black people from voting through impossible literacy tests, even if they did not actually have a law banning them from voting. It was a de facto ban.

    That's not the right term to use here because MGM does partially own the movies and explicitly finances them. It's not an implicit arrangement.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    BMB007 wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    BMB007 wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @justjames, they're striking against the studios, which is MGM-Amazon, who finance the Bond films.

    Bond films are not independently financed.

    They haven't auditioned anyone and the likelihood of auditioning now, while the strikes are ongoing, is basically zero.

    I work in the film industry. I have an independent I'm on right now called The Circle, and I can assure you, these strikes were taken very seriously by all, and on all sides.

    No one wants to cross picket lines, the literal and figurative ones. I can assure you, EoN has no interest in doing this either. None.

    They will wait until the SAG strike is settled.

    And from the latest news I've heard, I'm not confident that there's any type of script yet.

    Best advice I'd give fellow fans: enjoy all the Bond films, books, comics, games... The new Bond era will start, and likely has entered the first few steps into development, but I have to believe we're a bit aways away from auditions and the beginning of preproduction/production.

    I don’t think (nor do I support) anyone crossing the picket lines, as I say, I am just wondering how that would apply in this case to EON.
    As you say, MgM/Amazon is now de facto financier — no extra deals with Sony and whathaveyou — so that would be a factor.
    But by the same token, SAG is US only isn’t it? There are still British productions ongoing.

    I am not saying they *should* be edging the game slightly by doing screentests, but I am wondering if they legally *could* basically. And also wondering where that ends… I cannot see them going too far into casting or shooting, even with their production being Brit based.


    It's not "de facto" financier. It's the exact opposite of "de facto". It is an MGM production, and MGM is one of the struck companies. Any actor working on it would be a scab.

    De facto means ‘in fact’. In this case, because what is being said shows that it doesn’t matter if Eon is the one in basic control, it comes down to the MGM business.

    "De facto" implies it exists absent any legal authority. Southern states de facto banned Black people from voting through impossible literacy tests, even if they did not actually have a law banning them from voting. It was a de facto ban.

    That's not the right term to use here because MGM does partially own the movies and explicitly finances them. It's not an implicit arrangement.

    It can also mean with or without that, in this case I am using that because Bond does not belong to MGM *alone* but only in partnership with Eon. MGM for instance cannot go and make itself a Bond film without Eon. Whereas, historically, Eon can go work on one by themselves, at least to a certain point. Which is what I was considering here, as Eon is a British company.
    All of the balances have somewhat recently changed, with MGM now owned by Amazon, but it is known — for instance — that Sony were part of the deal right up to Spectre. (Hence the sudden radical appearance of non-Sony phones in NTTD)

  • edited October 2023 Posts: 137
    So here's some conjecture on my part. Will Poulter - He'd been in attendance at the Omega event way back in Nov 2022 and was seen chatting with Daniel Craig and Hayley Attwell.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=5lapfZLJY4A See 22 seconds in.

    omega-celebrates-60-years-of-james-bond-with-daniel-craig.jpg?s=2048x2048&w=gi&k=20&c=CxHnX5Vl_On7q8RXCVNtAEg4PscnyL8_w_rZFcSQ5zw=

    And at the recent Dior shoot he was seen wearing an Omega Aqua Terra Shades.

    Will-Poulter-Photoshoot-2023-Hunger-Magazine-001.jpg

    When asked why he wasn't wearing a Dior fashion watch he explained he had an upcoming project that contractually meant he was tied to Omega, he then waxed lyrical about being a big Omega fan and his watch being gifted to him by Raynald Aeschlimann, President and CEO of OMEGA.

    Summer_watch_spots_0004_Will_poulter_x_omega.jpg

    What's also interesting is that when asked about his training regime post Guardians of the Galaxy 3, he stated 2 months ago his next project would be physically the most intensive project to date. And he was continuing to work with Simon Waterson, who had got him in shape for GoG3, yep the same Simon who trained Daniel Craig. Now I know this is pure conjecture but there's some serious dots worthy of connecting.

    rs_1200x1200-220211125605-1200-Daniel_Craig-Simon_Waterson-selfie-gj.jpg?fit=around%7C1200:1200&output-quality=90&crop=1200:1200;center,top

    At 30, he'd be 31/32 once production wrapped, vs Aaron Taylor Johnson who is currently 33, taking him to roughly 35.




  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,401
    With 2024 staring us in the face and still no official amnouncement, the prospect of a 2025 release date for Bond 26 is now entering the rear view mirror sadly.

    There's just no way they are gonna put together a whole film from scratch + cast a new Bond in the next 24 months, you'd have to be crazy to believe that.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 137
    With 2024 staring us in the face and still no official announcement, the prospect of a 2025 release date for Bond 26 is now entering the rearview mirror sadly.

    There's just no way they are gonna put together a whole film from scratch + cast a new Bond in the next 24 months, you'd have to be crazy to believe that.

    I think the thing we're all potentially missing is, given the hiatus between completion and theatrical release for NTTD - that gave the producers a significant amount of extra time that we've not factored in. Given they knew how NTTD would play out plot-wise, what's to say that they've not used this time productively? NTTD wrapped in Oct 2019.

    007_NTTD-Wraps_LANDSCAPE.png

    It was released in Oct 2021 - that's 24 months, plus the time since release that's another 24 months. I can't see that no plans or discussion were had on what's next for Bond in what was a period of 4 years.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    @NeverSayNeverAgain great investigating mate.
    I've got to say I'm not a fan of Poulter for Bond, but who knows, there's worse candidates that's for certain.

    I'm sure EON are further along in the process than they've let on, once all the strikes are behind us I'm sure we'll hear more.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 137
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    @NeverSayNeverAgain great investigating mate.
    I've got to say I'm not a fan of Poulter for Bond, but who knows, there's worse candidates that's for certain.

    I'm sure EON are further along in the process than they've let on, once all the strikes are behind us I'm sure we'll hear more.

    Having seen how contracts have played out before with previous actors and then the snafu around Remington Steele with Dalton and Brosnan - it's easy to see how even the best conjecture is subject to some real world externalities.

    I just find it interesting that where Aaron Taylor Johnson has at least 3 projects back to back since Kraven the Hunter (The Fall Guy, Nosferatu and Rothko) taking him to at least late 2024, Will Poulter has nothing announced.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 579
    With 2024 staring us in the face and still no official amnouncement, the prospect of a 2025 release date for Bond 26 is now entering the rear view mirror sadly.

    There's just no way they are gonna put together a whole film from scratch + cast a new Bond in the next 24 months, you'd have to be crazy to believe that.

    If you make this comment again in April 2024, then I will agree.

    On a different note: question to the people who think the ATJ rumour is completely made up: Why do you think he reacted the way he did in that August Esquire article when the interviewer tried to mention the rumour?
Sign In or Register to comment.