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
Maybe. I don’t think there were any details about the production itself in the Deadline article. Maybe EON and Amazon have been kicking around the idea for some time. Maybe both parties were tipped off about the WSJ article before publication and released the remake news to get ahead of it. Whether the remake of CCBB was long gestating or recently developed, I think it could signify a change in the EON/Amazon relationship not reflected in the WSJ article.
https://variety.com/2024/film/news/chitty-chitty-bang-bang-remake-director-matthew-warchus-writer-enda-walsh-1236255802/
Published eighteen hours ago. Could this be damage control from EON and Amazon.
Carrots and sticks. WSJ is the stick; Variety is the carrot. Play ball and get movies. Think you're in charge and get your dirty laundry aired out. Amazon needs her more than she needs them. Barbara Broccoli is a respected producer. Amazon is an insurgent force distrusted.
I mean when was the last time the greats like Star Wars or Marvel put out something amazing no way home i think at that was 2021
Good call. I didn’t think of it from that angle. EON, through various unnamed sources, leaks info to the WJS in order to pressure Amazon through public opinion and the press.
Normally they get a director first.
I for one am not interested in Bond spinoffs. Who cares what Moneypenny, or Leiter, do when not interacting with Bond?
Amazon is weary of an unknown actor because it goes against what their data is telling them. Barbara probably believes that audiences don’t know what they want (within reason) until they give it to them. William Goldman said it best: “In Hollywood, no one knows anything.” If Hollywood or Big Tech could predict a hit, everything would be a hit.
All Amazon can do is to lobby them.
I hope that Barbara Broccoli, whom I've righteously defended against a few critical voices on this forum, will keep fighting the good fight. "What's taking her so long?" "She doesn't care about us!" Well, she does. Her "matriarchal" control of Bond may very well be the best thing that's happening to Bond right now. The same fans who worried that "Babs" was taking away Bond's masculinity should be more concerned with suits taking away his future. It's so easy to run a well-established series into the ground by causing fatigue among audiences. Indifference may pose the biggest threat to Bond, especially in times when 007 can no longer be the king of the action/adventure genre.
And yes, it all goes back to Harry and Cubby. A decision made half a century ago leaves Bond vulnerable to attacks from his worst enemies: corporate types with plans. We should consider that too whenever we feel like pointing accusing fingers at Barbara.
That may be true but lobbying when you own 50% of the IP or, at least, have exclusive distribution rights is some serious leverage. But Broccoli has leverage too. Maybe even more considering that studios want to produce movies so they can make money for shareholders. No movie. No money. Unhappy shareholders. This is especially true for a franchise of Bond’s caliber. But I don’t think EON can unilaterally make decisions. They have leverage but not complete control.
I didn’t say that EON had financial control. The studio does. One can’t be creative on a film with no money. So, while the studio defers to EON’s expertise on many issues, it’s not as though the studio has no leverage or say. That’s why we’re at a standstill with production on Bond 26.
Great post @DarthDimi
Once again, we're on the same page.
Brilliant post! She's fighting the good fight to keep Bond special.
Ps having said what I said previously , if some of the reports I’ve just read about Amazon are true then BB may have a point. Bond is most definitely a hero and needs to be a played by a British actor . I don’t want Amazon to ruin the franchise the way Disney has with Star Wars with their constant announcing and immediately projects.
Bond will only continue to be successful and draw crowds for as long as it is still associated with quality, and while Amazon getting their way might bring the occasional "force awakens" film, things would quickly go downhill. How many STAR WARS fans do you know that, with the benefit of hindsight, are glad DISNEY acquired the rights?
No, Barbara is doing the right thing.
Obviously, this is no real possibility; Bond is too recognizable to not be used and make money with sooner or later, but there’s a real possibility things might never be the same after Craig if the wrong hands take power. The thought of mediocre at best Bond films moving forward is more depressing to me than just calling it a day. I really hope things end up working out, but this series has been in a dark place for almost a decade now between the nightmare production of NTTD and this new mess happening with Amazon. If Bond’s vices and antihero kind of qualities are stripped away moving forward, I’m not interested.
What happened 50 years ago happened because it had to happen.
Connery knew this.
There is a certain trigger word, which you might hear in the future, and if you hear it, it means that the service has fallen partially or wholly under control of foreign power. If you hear it, you must give up what you are doing, no matter what it is, just stop, and go home.
You will not be mistaken, the boffins reckon that this word will not be found in any normal conversation, and you should be in no doubt when you hear it, what it means.
The trigger word is SKYFALL.
Now, in the film you can see that Bond COULDNT be mistaken when he heard the word, because the shrink inside the mi6 building said the word to him, during his word-play. He could not be mistaken. No one in the real life service, could miss understand either, because THEY USED IT AS A FILM TITLE. This shows evryone, that they were briefed correctly, and there can be no mistaking this.
They even included details - M represented The Queen, in those days, in case you didnt know. And you see on the bridge, that M loses control of her own computer, immdiately after the roof of the mi6 building is blown up. The roof came in, and M lost control of the service (partially, as it happens).
Its all in the films, chaps. Impossible to comprehend, unless you know what you are looking for, but they did tell you.
THE SERVICE HAS FALLEN, PARTIALY OR WHOLLY UNDER CONTROL OF FOREIGN POWER.
The only briefing i ever had about any clandestine power (from my 007 boss), by the way, was The Deutsche Verteidigungst Dienst, so im presuming it was them.
MGM had a long history of mismanagement and filed for bankruptcy in 2010.
Amazon bought MGM to continue the MGM franchises and make money from the back catalogue but Amazon are so astonishingly rich they can leave Bond dormant. They don't need MGM to make money because Amazon are not a traditional film studio - they are a global retailer. MGM did need Bond to keep the studio a viable concern and one attractive to buyers. Amazon are so wealthy they don't need MGM to be active. It's a crazy paradox. Eon need Amazon more than Amazon need Eon. If Eon refuse to deal with Amazon, well, Amazon can say "okay, we'll take you to court for unreasonable delay/breach of contract" or they say "okay, we don't need Bond. We want to make Bond films with you, but we don't need the franchise to be active."
Eon may have met their match with Amazon!
iI could be worse. Disney doesn't need Bond at all. It has too many franchises. Amazon at least sees its full potential