EoN sells up - Amazon MGM to produce 007 going forwards

1101113151618

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,366
    …. That we know of
  • Posts: 1,615
    007HallY wrote: »
    It's probably speculation (it all is at this point) but why would Nolan be any more likely to do a Bond film under Amazon than he was under EON? If he had issues with creative control and was committed to his own projects before I don't see a reason why that'd have changed.

    But obviously we're in uncharted waters. Maybe Amazon will go down the route of giving very established directors a good deal of creative control from film to film (although it remains to be seen in practice). So we'll see.

    Because Amazon needs a showrunner.
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,628
    I think the big thing they are addressing today is to push a movie as soon as possible since we only had 1 in the last ten years.
    I can't see them waiting 2 years to start production.
    Also, based on what they did with the other IPs (Ryan, Reacher, etc) I can see they focusing on a big name to star, not on a big one to direct.

    Was Alan Ritchson a big name before Reacher? I don't really know anything about him.

    I mean, in practice I can also see them defaulting to a more moderately known actor. Bond's a far bigger commitment than Reacher or Ryan, and perhaps hiring a Henry Cavill who's in demand and engaged in various different projects/franchises won't necessarily be the smartest choice. Much like EON too, I think a lot of it could depend on where they want to go story-wise. They might want to consciously go younger. Maybe anyway...
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 637
    Univex wrote: »
    Thing is, there is no script…

    We can't possibly know this.
    A change of scenario like the one that happened yesterday takes months, sometimes even years to happen. They surely started way back to develop a new movie, and I'm sure not only that.
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,646
    Considering the release date of NTTD (and our discussions re casting, script, director etc) it makes one wonder, was there ever any intention to produce another Bond or were they just holding out for a bigger cheque? It means literally years of no progress with zero momentum and it puts pressure on Amazon to make quick progress which may not be a good thing
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    edited February 21 Posts: 637
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the big thing they are addressing today is to push a movie as soon as possible since we only had 1 in the last ten years.
    I can't see them waiting 2 years to start production.
    Also, based on what they did with the other IPs (Ryan, Reacher, etc) I can see they focusing on a big name to star, not on a big one to direct.

    Was Alan Ritchson a big name before Reacher? I don't really know anything about him.

    I mean, in practice I can also see them defaulting to a more moderately known actor. Bond's a far bigger commitment than Reacher or Ryan, and perhaps hiring a Henry Cavill who's in demand and engaged in various different projects/franchises won't necessarily be the smartest choice. Much like EON too, I think a lot of it could depend on where they want to go story-wise. They might want to consciously go younger. Maybe anyway...

    Well, not as big as Krasinski or Pratt, but still well known as a Blue Mountain State Actor

    on the younger actor angle, we also talked about this with the EON timing in mind. Possibly we are now talking about a movie every other year, so a 40something could be ok for a 5 movies run.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,364
    007HallY wrote: »
    It's probably speculation (it all is at this point) but why would Nolan be any more likely to do a Bond film under Amazon than he was under EON? If he had issues with creative control and was committed to his own projects before I don't see a reason why that'd have changed.

    But obviously we're in uncharted waters. Maybe Amazon will go down the route of giving very established directors a good deal of creative control from film to film (although it remains to be seen in practice). So we'll see.

    This is based on nothing but my own thoughts, but if they wanted Nolan they'd have to base their entire medium term strategy around getting him and I don't see them doing that. If he were available starting in 2025, ok, but he's slightly busy at the moment.

    Of course, studios have done more stupid things, but announcing tomorrow (or in May or whenever) that you are going to let the series rest until Nolan is available is disastrous, as would be just getting some Bond film out the door and then letting Nolan do whatever he wants to do with the follow-up. That's exactly the whiplashing back and forth I hope they want to avoid. But I also don't think you get Nolan if you say "we'll have Edgar Wright do one film with Richard Madden. You'll have to follow the template Edgar establishes and keep the actor."
  • Posts: 1,615
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the big thing they are addressing today is to push a movie as soon as possible since we only had 1 in the last ten years.
    I can't see them waiting 2 years to start production.
    Also, based on what they did with the other IPs (Ryan, Reacher, etc) I can see they focusing on a big name to star, not on a big one to direct.

    Was Alan Ritchson a big name before Reacher? I don't really know anything about him.

    I mean, in practice I can also see them defaulting to a more moderately known actor. Bond's a far bigger commitment than Reacher or Ryan, and perhaps hiring a Henry Cavill who's in demand and engaged in various different projects/franchises won't necessarily be the smartest choice. Much like EON too, I think a lot of it could depend on where they want to go story-wise. They might want to consciously go younger. Maybe anyway...

    If they want Cavill there will be no "other projects."

    They have plenty of money to clear his schedule.
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,628
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the big thing they are addressing today is to push a movie as soon as possible since we only had 1 in the last ten years.
    I can't see them waiting 2 years to start production.
    Also, based on what they did with the other IPs (Ryan, Reacher, etc) I can see they focusing on a big name to star, not on a big one to direct.

    Was Alan Ritchson a big name before Reacher? I don't really know anything about him.

    I mean, in practice I can also see them defaulting to a more moderately known actor. Bond's a far bigger commitment than Reacher or Ryan, and perhaps hiring a Henry Cavill who's in demand and engaged in various different projects/franchises won't necessarily be the smartest choice. Much like EON too, I think a lot of it could depend on where they want to go story-wise. They might want to consciously go younger. Maybe anyway...

    Well, not as big as Krasinski or Pratt, but still well known as a Blue Mountain State Actor

    Ah so more moderately known on American tv? None of his previous shows/films mean anything to me before Reacher, haha. I didn't think he was a big star. He's well cast as Reacher to be fair (I don't like the character at all though, but he suits it).

    Anyway, like I said, I don't think the role will be any less of a commitment, and often it was the studios who shot down big name stars for Bond. We'll see.
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think the big thing they are addressing today is to push a movie as soon as possible since we only had 1 in the last ten years.
    I can't see them waiting 2 years to start production.
    Also, based on what they did with the other IPs (Ryan, Reacher, etc) I can see they focusing on a big name to star, not on a big one to direct.

    Was Alan Ritchson a big name before Reacher? I don't really know anything about him.

    I mean, in practice I can also see them defaulting to a more moderately known actor. Bond's a far bigger commitment than Reacher or Ryan, and perhaps hiring a Henry Cavill who's in demand and engaged in various different projects/franchises won't necessarily be the smartest choice. Much like EON too, I think a lot of it could depend on where they want to go story-wise. They might want to consciously go younger. Maybe anyway...

    If they want Cavill there will be no "other projects."

    They have plenty of money to clear his schedule.

    Depends on contractual obligations and what exactly he's doing/with who (I don't know personally).

    I'm not sure if even with an algorithm, public based way of getting the next Bond he'd be the most popular. I noticed after his screen-test was released some people were a bit more on the fence about him as Bond (whether fair or not). But anything's possible. I do think he comes with risks as a potential Bond though.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,366
    I agree with The Bond Experience’s David Zaritsky that Amazon has probably had a creative team in place for some time developing their Bond.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,656
    I don't think we're going to be waiting for answers for very long, I get the feeling that the timing of this announcement was very deliberate. This has probably been planned for months, and Amazon has a lot of stuff worked out behind the scenes.
  • Posts: 1,615
    They paid a lot of money to get rid of Barbara. Hiring Cavill shouldn't be a problem for them if they really want him.

    I don't think it will happen but I don't rule it out either.
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,628
    They paid a lot of money to get rid of Barbara. Hiring Cavill shouldn't be a problem for them if they really want him.

    I don't think it will happen but I don't rule it out either.

    No, nothing can be ruled out until... well, it's ruled out.

    But I'm just not sure he's the most likely pick either. I don't think it'd be worth it from most perspectives.

    Personally, I hope they go much more fresh faced and not just chuck a big name in there. If it's to be believed that they've been planning this creative shift for a while now it might be the case that the stuff EON have been saying publicly still holds up (ie. that they'd ideally like an actor in his 30s, with the gravitas needed, not necessarily a big name etc).
  • Posts: 1,615
    I don't think they'd hire an ugly actor from an indie movie. There's a lot of money at stake here.
  • Someone's going to have to take the plunge and take on the heat lol.
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 637
    I think it's much more likely that Krasinski (Or a name like that) takes the role instead of Cavill.

    I'd personally like Madden to take the role with a 10 or 15 years tenure
  • Posts: 185
    I'm wondering will there still be Michael g Wilson cameos lol
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,628
    I think it's much more likely that Krasinski (Or a name like that) takes the role instead of Cavill.

    I'd personally like Madden to take the role with a 10 or 15 years tenure

    God that'd be upsetting, having seen clips of Citadel.

    An American Bond as well I can't see going down well with anyone.
  • Posts: 2,037
    I think Amazon is gonna go one of 2 ways for the next movie. They will either cast a really known actor like Henry Cavill to play Bond with a known but not a high demand director. Or they will go with a lesser known but known actor to play Bond like how Craig was when he began Bond and have a high demand pretty famous Director like a Nolan to direct.
  • Posts: 185
    I wonder if they will still work with some bond people like Chris corbold and stuff or they solely EON?
  • zb007zb007 UK
    edited February 21 Posts: 94
    zb007 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    Fleming himself created a perfect "universe" to be expanded upon by having at least six other agents with a boss and supporting characters that we know and love. I find it strange that some Bond fans would not be interested in a 005 movie (for example) no matter how great the writing, acting, direction was, purely because Bond is not in the movie. There is huge potential here...whether Amazon are up to the job is a different question.

    Because people don’t care about the likes of 005 it might be in there but that doesn’t mean we need to see anything based on it

    I'd watch it.
    Your views don't necesarily allign with "people"'s one

    Sorry my mistake why haven’t they done one before then
  • Posts: 2,037
    I wonder if they will still work with some bond people like Chris corbold and stuff or they solely EON?

    If Amazon was smart, they would try and retain some of the Bond people to work on the next film. Chris Corbold for special effects and Daniel Kleinman for the titles are the two people from the Bond family I would definitely bring back and try to keep on for the next film and another films after that as long as they’re able to do so
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,646
    surely, if you want that instant Bond feel, you go for Arnold? you want as many safe pairs of hands as possible
  • edited February 21 Posts: 3,335
    talos7 wrote: »
    I agree with The Bond Experience’s David Zaritsky that Amazon has probably had a creative team in place for some time developing their Bond.

    Yes I think so too. We may find an actor has already been cast and a script has been written already, but everyone has had to keep quiet while these legal wranglings were taking place. It also explains why from Barbara's perspective nothing was happening from her side in the development of the next Bond. It's all been on Amazon.

    What would be a bigger surprise is if someone like Nolan has already been hired too, but again the lid has been kept firmly shut for months.

    I also think Amazon will play it extremely safe in terms of their first Bond film. There won't be too many risks or edgy decisions. The actor will be in the mould of traditional cinematic Bond - tall, white, dark hair, etc. The script will incorporate unused bits of Fleming, Arnold will probably return, and the song will be a safe painting-by-numbers single, maybe even bringing someone like Adele back, like Bassey did with her numerous returns to the franchise.

    Now the cats out of the bag, I'm guessing it will be Bond news galore over the next few months.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,364
    patb wrote: »
    surely, if you want that instant Bond feel, you go for Arnold? you want as many safe pairs of hands as possible

    That's what I thought as well. Get Arnold, Corbould, Gassner and Kleinmann to make sure the scaffolding at least looks the same. I doubt they'd keep the McWilliams' for casting and I don't think Purvis and Wade will be back, but maybe Logan, Haggis or Butterworth.
    That's one of the big questions: Will they try to make the transition as seamless as possible and go for as many classic elements as possible, or will they get rid of a lot of stuff to put their stamp on it? Most of us probably thought the DB5 was finally done for at least a few films, but the new overlords may feel like they have to bring it back to keep the connection to the previous films.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,656
    talos7 wrote: »
    I agree with The Bond Experience’s David Zaritsky that Amazon has probably had a creative team in place for some time developing their Bond.

    Yes I think so too. We may find an actor has already been cast and a script has been written already, but everyone has had to keep quiet while these legal wranglings were taking place. It also explains why from Barbara's perspective nothing was happening from her side in the development of the next Bond. It's all been on Amazon.

    What would be a bigger surprise is if someone like Nolan has already been hired too, but again the lid has been kept firmly shut for months.

    I also think Amazon will play it extremely safe in terms of their first Bond film. There won't be too many risks or edgy decisions. The actor will be in the mould of traditional cinematic Bond - tall, white, dark hair, etc. The script will incorporate unused bits of Fleming, Arnold will probably return, and the song will be a safe painting-by-numbers single, maybe even bringing someone like Adele back, like Bassey did with her numerous returns to the franchise.

    Now the cats out of the bag, I'm guessing it will be Bond news galore over the next few months.

    Music to my ears. =D>
  • Posts: 6,755
    What ever happened to that "secret big project" Villeneuve was talking about directing right after Dune Messiah wraps filming this year?

    It'd be lovely to get him as the director. And I agree, the safest bet for any sense of continuity is to get Arnold back. Although I can't really see that happening.
  • edited February 21 Posts: 4,646
    The irony is that, if they wanted to hammer home, seamlessly that this is the real Bond, they would bring back BW, NH and RF. It enormity of NTTD now hits home. (when did we last have new Bond, new MP, new Q, new M in one movie?) these loved supporting characters can offer much needed continuity.
  • Posts: 9,904
    Benny wrote: »
    I think this is arguably the biggest news in the series history since Cubby and Harry signed a deal with David Picker at UA.

    Yes you’re right. This is bigger than Harry leaving, or Barbara taking over too.

    This is the first time in a long while that I’ve been genuinely excited again as a Bond fan.

    I’m guessing this negotiation has been going on for a long while. I’m also guessing Amazon could already have been working behind the scenes for a few months on the next film, and we could get an announcement on who the next Bond is very soon. We are no longer following the EON playbook anymore now on how an actor is selected.

    Now this legally has been announced and is out of the way, I bet we are in for some real news on Bond 26 anytime soon.

    to quote 007 himself "you must give me the name of oculist"
  • SkyfallCraigSkyfallCraig Rome, Italy
    Posts: 637
    zb007 wrote: »
    zb007 wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    Fleming himself created a perfect "universe" to be expanded upon by having at least six other agents with a boss and supporting characters that we know and love. I find it strange that some Bond fans would not be interested in a 005 movie (for example) no matter how great the writing, acting, direction was, purely because Bond is not in the movie. There is huge potential here...whether Amazon are up to the job is a different question.

    Because people don’t care about the likes of 005 it might be in there but that doesn’t mean we need to see anything based on it

    I'd watch it.
    Your views don't necesarily allign with "people"'s one

    Sorry my mistake why haven’t they done one before then

    Because they didn't like it.
    Do you think they did all they did only to please the audience? If that was the case we would be at Bond 55 and no Craig would have happened.
Sign In or Register to comment.